Gender-related issues in a Taiwanese university medical science laboratory setting: a qualitative analysis
- PMID: 37384189
- PMCID: PMC10293633
- DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1178921
Gender-related issues in a Taiwanese university medical science laboratory setting: a qualitative analysis
Abstract
Introduction: This paper provides a glimpse into gender issues in a university-based medical science laboratory setting in northern Taiwan. In this study, gender issues with respect to perceptions regarding gender, the degree of gender neutrality in the work environment, and the influence of gender on researchers' academic careers were analyzed.
Methods: From July to August 2021, semistructured interviews to understand the perspectives of five faculty members at Chang Gung University School of Medicine regarding gender issues were conducted. The data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically. Subsequently, coding was performed using ATLAS.ti Web (Version 4.0.10).
Results and discussion: It was found that gender is not perceived to correlate with performance in the medical sciences. Although the medical science laboratories in the study institution are mostly gender-neutral, instances of discrimination might have been concealed elsewhere because of underreporting. Nevertheless, medical science research culture in Chang Gung University appears to promote respect and equality owing to increased general awareness regarding such issues as well as robust policies that protect women's rights and promote gender equality. Marriage, motherhood, and family obligations remain key challenges to the academic career of female scientists in the institution. To achieve more equitable representation of male and female scientists as well as to prevent female scientists from leaving medical science laboratories in Taiwan, institutional and national policies that provide tailored support for female scientists intending to start families must continue to be implemented.
Keywords: gender equality; health professional; higher education; scientific careers; women researchers.
Copyright © 2023 Tseng and Chang.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science: an exploratory study of women's and men's perceptions.Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Feb 21;15(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0177-9. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017. PMID: 28222735 Free PMC article.
-
Professional Experiences and Career Trajectories of Mid- to Senior-Career Women Clinician-Scientists: A Qualitative Study.JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Apr 1;7(4):e246040. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.6040. JAMA Netw Open. 2024. PMID: 38602674 Free PMC article.
-
Barriers of West African women scientists in their research and academic careers: A qualitative research.PLoS One. 2022 Mar 30;17(3):e0265413. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265413. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35353842 Free PMC article.
-
Organisational best practices towards gender equality in science and medicine.Lancet. 2019 Feb 9;393(10171):587-593. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33188-X. Lancet. 2019. PMID: 30739694 Review.
-
[Glass ceiling and gender inequalities in the careers of women academics in biomedical sciences].Gac Sanit. 2020 Jul-Aug;34(4):403-410. doi: 10.1016/j.gaceta.2018.10.008. Epub 2019 Nov 8. Gac Sanit. 2020. PMID: 31708124 Review. Spanish.
References
-
- About TWiST [Internet] . The Society of Taiwan Women in Science and Technology. (2020). Available at: https://v1.twist.org.tw/en/about-us/ (Accessed July 29, 2022).
-
- Blickenstaff J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gend. Educ. 17, 369–386. doi: 10.1080/09540250500145072 - DOI
-
- Braun V., Clarke V. (2012). “Thematic analysis” in APA handbook of research methods in psychology, vol. 2: research designs: quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. eds. Cooper H., Camic P. M., Long D. L., Panter A. T., Rindskopf D., Sher K. J. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; ), 57–71.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources