Anti-Nepotism's Ghost: Attitudes of Administrators Toward Hiring Professional Couples

Abstract

Laws and policies are often the formalization of attitudes. The attitudes that originally led to the policy continue even when the policy no longer exists. We felt the anti-nepotism policies, declared discriminatory by HEW's Office of Civil Rights, were still in effect in the attitudes of college and university faculty. To test this, we surveyed the chairpersons of departments of psychology and sociology concerning their attitudes toward hiring a professional couple in their department. Responses to the question “Overall, how likely is it you would support the hiring of a professional couple?” indicated opposition by 37% of the chairpersons, neutrality by 25%, and support by 38%. When asked to list comments under four headings—advantages to department, disadvantages to department, professional advantages to couple, and professional disadvantages to couple—we found that supporters were more likely than opposers to mention advantages to the department and to the couple and that opposers were more likely than supporters to mention disadvantages to the department and to the couple. The types of comments made by the chairpersons may be useful to academic couples wishing to work together.

“When James J. Gibson, a psychologist, moved from Smith College to Cornell University in 1948, his wife, Eleanor, also a psychologist, applied for a teaching job in her husband's department. Sixteen years later, she was hired.…

“When Janet Taylor Spence went to the University of Texas in 1964, she had to forego teaching in the psychology department because her husband was already employed there. Instead she moved into the educational psychology department… In 1967 her husband died and she moved into the psychology department. A year later, she was named department chairman.”