...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Societies >Unconscious Gender Bias in Academia: Scarcity of Empirical Evidence
【24h】

Unconscious Gender Bias in Academia: Scarcity of Empirical Evidence

机译：学术界的无意识性别偏见：经验证据的稀缺性

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Implicit or unconscious bias is commonly proposed to be responsible for women’s underrepresentation in academia. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and discuss the evidence supporting this proposition. Publications about unconscious/implicit gender bias in academia indexed in Scopus or psycInfo up to February 2020 were identified. More than half were published in the period 2018–2020. Studies reporting empirical data were scrutinized for data, as well as analyses showing an association of a measure of implicit or unconscious bias and lesser employment or career opportunities in academia for women than for men. No studies reported empirical evidence as thus defined. Reviews of unconscious bias identified via informal searches referred exclusively to studies that did not self-identify as addressing unconscious bias. Reinterpretations and misrepresentations of studies were common in these reviews. More empirical evidence about unconscious gender bias in academia is needed. With the present state of knowledge, caution should be exercised when interpreting data about gender gaps in academia. Ascribing observed gender gaps to unconscious bias is unsupported by the scientific literature.
机译：普遍提出隐含或无意识的偏见，负责妇女在学术界的代表性陈述。这个范围审查的目的是识别和讨论支持这一命题的证据。确定了关于Scopus或Psycinfo的学术界无意识/隐含性别偏见的出版物，达到2020年2月2020年2月。超过一半在2018 - 2012年期间发表。报告经验数据的研究被审查以进行数据，以及分析，显示衡量妇女学术界的隐性或无意识偏见和较小的就业或职业机会的分析而非男性。没有研究报告如此定义的经验证据。通过非正式搜索识别的无意识偏见的评论专门用于研究并没有自我识别，因为解决无意识偏见。在这些评论中，研究的重新解释和歪曲都是常见的。需要有关学术界的无意识性别偏见的更多实证证据。通过目前的知识状态，在解释学术界的性别差距数据时，应谨慎行事。归属观察了对无意识偏见的性别差距不受科学文学不支持。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号