In this article, we present the development and validation of the Perceived Subtle Gender Bias Index. Given the inherent difficulty in identifying and measuring the perceptions of subtle gender biases, this index provides researchers and interventionists with a tool that does not require participants to identify/label an event as a gender bias incident. We used a mixed method and constructivist approach that prioritized and privileged the voices and experiences of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The current article describes two studies: (1) index development and (2) index refinement and validation, using a national survey of women academics (N = 882). Findings support a four-subscale structure, including perceived gender inequity, collegiality, mentorship, and institutional support. Methods and analyses support face, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity for the use of the index among academic faculty women. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ’s website athttp://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684319877199
AgarsM. D. (2004). Reconsidering the impact of gender stereotypes on the advancement of women in organizations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 103–111. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00127.x
2.
AguirreA.Jr. (2000). Women and minority faculty in the academic workplace: Recruitment, retention, and academic culture. Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
AntecolH.BedardK.StearnsJ. (2018). Equal but inequitable: Who benefits from gender-neutral tenure clock stopping policies?American Economic Review, 108, 2421–2441. doi:10.1257/aer.20160613
4.
AxelsonR. D.SolowC. M.FergusonK. J.CohenM. B. (2010). Assessing implicit gender bias in medical student performance evaluations. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 33, 365–385. doi:10.1177/0163278710375097
5.
BagilholeB. (2002). Challenging equal opportunities: Changing and adapting male hegemony in academia. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23, 19–33. doi:10.1080/01425690120102836
6.
BailynL. (2003). Academic careers and gender equity: Lessons learned from MIT. Gender, Work & Organization, 10, 137–153. doi:10.1111/1468-0432.00008
7.
BasfordT. E.OffermannL. R.BehrendT. S. (2014). Do you see what I see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 340–349. doi:10.1177/0361684313511420
8.
BetzN. E.FitzgeraldL. F. (1987). The career psychology of women. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
9.
BilimoriaD.JoyS.LiangX. (2008). Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness: Lessons of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and engineering. Human Resource Management, 47, 423–441. doi:10.1002/hrm.20225
10.
BilimoriaD.StewartA. J. (2009). “Don’t ask, don’t tell”: The academic climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender faculty in science and engineering. NWSA Journal, 21, 85–103. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20628175
11.
BondM. A.PunnettL.PyleJ. L.CazecaD.CoopermanM. (2004). Gendered work conditions, health, and work outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 28. doi:10.1037/1076-8998.9.1.28
12.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230–258. doi:10.1177/0049124192021002005
13.
BuchK.HuetY.RorrerA.RobersonL. (2011). Removing the barriers to full professor: A mentoring program for associate professors. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43, 38–45. doi:10.1080/00091383.2011.618081
14.
CarrolD. (2017). A faculty woman of color and micro-invalidations at a White research institution: A case of intersectionality and institutional betrayal. Administrative Issues Journal, 7, 39–50. doi:10.5929/2017.7.1.2
15.
CattellR. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis. New York, NY: Plenum.
16.
CheryanS.MeltzoffA. N.KimS. (2011). Classrooms matter: The design of virtual classrooms influences gender disparities in computer science classes. Computers & Education, 57, 1825–1835. doi:10.1016/ j.compedu.2011.02.004
17.
ChristopherA. N.MullM. S. (2006). Conservative ideology and ambivalent sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 223–230. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00284.x
ComreyA. L.LeeH. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
CortinaL. M.MagleyV. J.WilliamsJ. H.LanghoutR. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64–80. doi:10.1037//1076-8998.6.1.64
21.
CostelloA. B.OsborneJ. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9. doi:10.4135/9781412995627.d8
22.
CoxM. D. (1997). Long-term patterns in a mentoring program for junior faculty: Recommendations for practice. To Improve the Academy, 16, 225–267. doi:10.1002/j.2334-4822.1997.tb00329.x
23.
CroomN.PattonL. (2011). The miner’s canary: A critical race perspective on the representation of black women full professors. Negro Educational Review, 62/63, 13–39. Retrieved fromhttps://works.bepress.com/loripattondavis/22/download/
24.
CrossJ. G.GoldenbergE. N. (2009). Off-track profs: Nontenured teachers in higher education. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
DardenneB.DumontM.BollierT. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 93, 764–779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764
26.
FitzgeraldL. F.ShullmanS. L.BaileyN.RichardsM.SweckerJ.GoldY.…WeitzmanL. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplaceJournal of Vocational Behavior32152–175doi:10.1016/0001-8791(88)90012-7
27.
GappaJ.LeslieD. (1993). The invisible faculty: Improving the status of part-timers in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28.
GauntR. (2013). Ambivalent sexism and perceptions of men and women who violate gendered family roles. Community, Work & Family, 16, 401–416. doi:10.1080/13668803.2013.779231
29.
GlickP.DieboldJ.Bailey-WernerB.ZhuL. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334. doi:10.1177/01461672972312009
30.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x
31.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109
32.
GorsuchR. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
33.
Gutiérrez y MuhsG.NiemannY. F.GonzálezC. G.HarrisA. P. (2012). Presumed incompetent: The intersections of race and class for women in academia. Logan: Utah State University Press.
34.
HagedornL. S. (2000). Conceptualizing faculty job satisfaction: Components, theories, and outcomes. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2000, 5–20. doi:10.1002/ir.10501
35.
HanW. J.RuhmC.WaldfogelJ. (2009). Parental leave policies and parents’ employment and leave-taking. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 28, 29–54. doi:10.1002/pam.20398
36.
HeilmanM. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113–135. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003
37.
HeilmanM. E.HaynesM. C. (2005). No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women’s success in male-female teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 905–916. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.905
38.
HerbozoS.ThompsonJ. K. (2006). Development and validation of the verbal commentary on physical appearance scale: Considering both positive and negative commentary. Body Image, 3, 335–344. doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2006.10.001
39.
HollensheadC.WaltmanJ.AugustL.MillerJ.SmithG.BellA. (2007). Making the best of both worlds: Findings from a national institution-level survey on non-tenure-track faculty. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Education of Women.
40.
HostlerS.GressardR. (1993). Appendix 3C: Gender fairness environment scale [developed by the University of Virginia School of Medicine Committee on Women]. Perceptions of the medical education environment. The Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association, 48, 51–54.
41.
KezarA.SamC. (2010). Understanding the new majority of not tenure-track faculty in higher education: Demographics, experiences and plans of action. ASHE Higher Education Report (36, No. 4). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
42.
LandrineH.KlonoffE. A. (1997). Discrimination against women: Prevalence, consequences, remedies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43.
LilaM.GraciaE.GarcíaF. (2013). Ambivalent sexism, empathy and law enforcement attitudes towards partner violence against women among male police officers. Psychology, Crime & Law, 19, 907–919. doi: 10.1080/1068316X.2012.719619
44.
LindnerD.Tantleff-DunnS. (2017). The development and psychometric evaluation of the self-objectification beliefs and behaviors scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41, 254–272. doi:10.1177/0361684317692109
45.
MaderaJ. M.HeblM. R.MartinR. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1591–1599. doi:10.1037/a0016539
46.
MarchantA.BhattacharyaA.CarnesM. (2007). Can the language of tenure criteria influence women’s academic advancement?Journal of Women’s Health, 16, 998–1003. doi:10.1089/jwh.2007.0348
47.
MasonM. A.WolfingerN. H.GouldenM. (2013). Do babies matter? Gender and family in the ivory tower. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
48.
MasserB. M.AbramsD. (2004). Reinforcing the glass ceiling: The consequences of hostile sexism for female managerial candidates. Sex Roles, 51, 609–615. doi:10.1007/s11199-004-5470-8
49.
MattesonA. V.MoradiB. (2005). Examining the structure of the schedule of sexist events: Replication and extension. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 47–57. doi:10.1111/j.0361-6843.2005.00167.x
50.
McBrierD. B. (2003). Gender and career dynamics within a segmented professional labor market: The case of law academia. Social Forces, 81, 1201–1266. doi:10.1353/sof.2003.0065
51.
MoorsA. C.MalleyJ. E.StewartA. J. (2014). My family matters: Gender and perceived support for family commitments and satisfaction in academia among postdocs and faculty in STEMM and non-STEMM fields. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 460–474. doi:10.1177/0361684314542343
52.
MottazlC. (1986). Gender differences in work satisfaction, work-related rewards and values, and the determinants of work satisfaction. Human Relations, 39, 359–377. doi:10.1177/001872678603900405
53.
NadalK. L. (2010). Gender microaggressions and women: Implications for mental health. In PaludiM. A. (Ed.), Feminism and women’s rights worldwide, Volume 2: Mental and physical health (pp. 155–175). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
54.
NadalK. L. (2011). The Racial and Ethnic Microaggressions Scale (REMS): Construction, reliability, and validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 470. doi:10.1037/a0025193
55.
Nelson LairdT. F.SullivanD. F.ZimmermanC.McCormickA. C. (2011). STEM/Non-STEM differences in engagement at US institutions. Peer Review, 13, 23–26.
56.
NeuendorfK. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
NguyenH. H. D.RyanA. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 1314–1334. doi:10.1037/a0012702
58.
PfefferJ.LangtonN. (1993). The effect of wage dispersion on satisfaction, productivity, and working collaboratively: Evidence from college and university faculty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 382–407. doi:10.2307/2393373
59.
RhoadsS. E. (2005). Taking sex differences seriously. San Francisco, CA: Encounter Books.
60.
RigerS.StokesJ.RajaS.SullivanM. (1997). Measuring perceptions of the work environment for faculty. The Review of Higher Education, 21, 63–78. doi:10.1353/rhe.1997.0015
61.
Rossin-SlaterM.RuhmC. J.WaldfogelJ. (2013). The effects of California’s paid family leave program on mothers’ leave-taking and subsequent labor market outcomes. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 32, 224–245. doi:10.1002/pam.21676
62.
RoweM. P. (1990). Barriers to equality: The power of subtle discrimination to maintain unequal opportunity. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 3, 153–163. doi:10.1007/BF01388340
63.
RussellK. (1998). The color of crime. New York, NY: University Press.
64.
SavageH. E.KarpR. S.LogueR. (2004). Faculty mentorship at colleges and universities. College Teaching, 52, 21–24. doi:10.3200/CTCH.52.1.21-24
65.
SeifertT.UmbachP. (2008). The effects of faculty demographic characteristics and disciplinary context on dimensions of job satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 49, 357–381. doi:10.1007/s11162-007-9084-1
66.
SettlesI. H.CortinaL. M.BuchananN. T.MinerK. N. (2013). Derogation, discrimination, and (dis) satisfaction with jobs in science: A gendered analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 179–191. doi:10.1177/0361684312468727
67.
SettlesI. H.CortinaL. M.StewartA. J.MalleyJ. (2007). Voice matters: Buffering the impact of a negative climate for women in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 270–281. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00370.x
68.
SolorzanoD.CejaM.YossoT. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60–73. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2696265
69.
SteeleC. M. (2011). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
70.
Stepan-NorrisJ.KerrisseyJ. (2016). Enhancing gender equity in academia: Lessons from the ADVANCE program. Sociological Perspectives, 59, 225–245. doi:10.1177/0731121415582103
71.
SueD. W.BucceriJ.LinA. I.NadalK. L.TorinoG. C. (2007). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 72–81. doi:10.1037/1948-1985.S.188
72.
SwimJ. K.CohenL. L. (1997). Overt, covert, and subtle sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 103–118. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00103.x
73.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2011). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
74.
TorenN. (1991). Women at the top: Female full professors in higher education in Israel. In KellyG. P.SlaughterS. (Eds.), Women’s higher education in comparative perspective (pp. 165–184). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
75.
TrowerC. A.BleakJ. L. (2004). Study of new scholars. Gender: Statistical report [Universities]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
76.
VaccaroA. (2017). “Trying to act like racism is not there”: Women of Color at a predominantly white women’s college challenging dominant ideologies by exposing racial microaggressions. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 10, 262–280. doi:10.1080/19407882.2017.1348303
77.
ValianV. (2005). Beyond gender schemas: Improving the advancement of women in academia. Hypatia, 20, 198–213. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2005.tb00495.x
78.
WeisshaarK. (2017). Publish and perish? An assessment of gender gaps in promotion to tenure in academia. Social Forces, 96, 529–560. doi:10.1093/sf/sox052
79.
WestM. S.CurtisJ. W. (2006). AAUP faculty gender equity indicators. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.
80.
XuY. J. (2008). Gender disparity in STEM disciplines: A study of faculty attrition and turnover intentions. Research in Higher Education, 49, 607–624. doi:10.1007/s11162-008-9097-4
81.
YoderJ. D. (2018). Challenging the gendered academic hierarchy: The artificial separation of research, teaching, and feminist activism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42, 127–135. doi:10.1177/036168431876269
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
