Seeing Is Believing
The Presence and Impact of Ambient Sexism Toward Collegiate Women in STEM
Abstract
Abstract: We investigate how visual cues in universities discourage women from pursuing STEM. We extend research on ambient sexism (i.e., witnessing sexist mistreatment of others) to include environmental cues that women do not belong. Men were pictured in STEM buildings (Pilot Study 1) and described in university-sponsored STEM news articles (Pilot Study 2) twice as often as women. In an experiment, undergraduate women who read about male scientists reported less positive STEM attitudes relative to men who read about male scientists and women who read about female scientists. Women who read about and saw images of female scientists reported more positive STEM attitudes than women who simply read about female scientists. Depicting predominantly male scientists in universities negatively impacts female students.
References
2015). The collateral damage of ambient sexism: Observing sexism impacts bystander self-esteem and career aspirations. Sex Roles, 73(1–2), 29–42. 10.1007/s11199-015-0512-y
(2011). Professional role confidence and gendered persistence in engineering. American Sociological Review, 76(5), 641–666. 10.1177/0003122411420815
(2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1045–1060. 10.1037/a0016239
(1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In B. M. StawL. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 191–233). JAI Press.
(2011). Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the self-concept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychological Inquiry, 22(4), 231–246. 10.1080/1047840X.2011.607313
(2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(5), 642–658. 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003
(2005). Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women’s leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(2), 276–287. 10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.276
(2017). Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(23), 5964–5969. 10.1073/pnas.1613117114
(2017). Speaker introductions at Internal Medicine Grand Rounds: Forms of address reveal gender bias. Journal of Women’s Health, 26(5), 413–419. 10.1089/jwh.2016.6044
(1997). Ambient sexual harassment: An integrated model of antecedents and consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71(3), 309–328. 10.1006/obhd.1997.2728
(2019). Perspectives on academic mentorship from sexual and gender minority students pursuing careers in the health sciences. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 89(3), 343–353. 10.1037/ort0000410
(2019). Identity, campus climate, and burnout among undergraduate women in STEM fields. Career Development Quarterly, 67(2), 96–109. 10.1002/cdq.12174
(2019). Exploring identity-safety cues and allyship among Black women students in STEM environments. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 131–150. 10.1177/0361684319830926
(2016). STEM stereotypic attribution bias among women in an unwelcoming science setting. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(3), 378–397. 10.1177/0361684316630965
(2001). Distinguishing between employees’ perceptions of person–job and person–organization fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(3), 454–470. 10.1006/jvbe.2001.1807
(2019). Helping and hindering undergraduate women’s STEM motivation: Experiences with STEM encouragement, STEM-related gender bias, and sexual harassment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 165–183. 10.1177/0361684318806302
(2010). Students’ attitudes toward STEM: Development of an instrument for high school STEM-based programs. Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 24–34. 10.21061/jots.v36i1.a.4
(2005). The social psychology of stigma. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 393–421. 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137
(2020). Proportions of women in STEM leadership in the academy in the USA. Journal of Intelligence, 10(1), 1–13. 10.3390/educsci10010001
(2016). Observed workplace incivility toward women, perceptions of interpersonal injustice, and observer occupational well-being: Differential effects for gender of the observer. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article
(482 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.004822004). Working in a context of hostility toward women: Implications for employees’ well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9(2), 107–122. 10.1037/1076-8998.9.2.107
(2007). Beyond targets: Consequences of vicarious exposure to misogyny at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1254–1269. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1254
(2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18(10), 879–885. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
(2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2019. Special Report NSF 19-304. https://nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
(2018). Gender disparities in colloquium speakers at top universities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(1), 104–108. 10.1073/pnas.1708414115
(2019). Who encourages Latina women to feel a sense of identity-safety in STEM environments? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, Article
(103827 . 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.1038272021). Seeing what’s possible: Videos are more effective than written portrayals for enhancing the relatability of scientists and promoting Black female students’ interest in STEM. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 84(1–2), 14–33. 10.1007/s11199-020-01153-x
(2018). One size may not fit all: Exploring how the intersection of race and gender and stigma consciousness predict effective identity-safe cues for Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 291–306. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.021
(2013). The effects of an academic environment intervention on science identification among women in STEM. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 16(3), 377–397. 10.1007/s11218-013-9218-6
(2006). The climate for women in academic science: The good, the bad, and the changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), 47–58. 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00261.x
(1982). The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports, 51(2), 663–671. 10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663
(2023). Seeing is believing: The presence and impact of ambient sexism toward collegiate women in STEM [Data, code, analysis]. https://github.com/silverer/Seeing-is-Believing?
(1997). A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. The American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629. 10.1037//0003-066x.52.6.613
(2016). The frequency of “brilliant” and “genius” in teaching evaluations predicts the representation of women and African Americans across fields. PLoS ONE, 11(3), Article
(015019 . 10.1371/journal.pone.01501942015). The development and validation of a measure of student attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and math (S-STEM). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(7), 622–639. 10.1177/0734282915571160
(2019, January 22). 2019 Best National Universities | US News Rankings. Usnews.Com. https://web.archive.org/web/20190122012218/https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
(