Suscripción a Biblioteca: Guest
Portal Digitalde Biblioteca Digital eLibros Revistas Referencias y Libros de Ponencias Colecciones
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering
SJR: 0.468 SNIP: 0.905 CiteScore™: 1.65

ISSN Imprimir: 1072-8325
ISSN En Línea: 1940-431X

Volumes:
Volumen 26, 2020 Volumen 25, 2019 Volumen 24, 2018 Volumen 23, 2017 Volumen 22, 2016 Volumen 21, 2015 Volumen 20, 2014 Volumen 19, 2013 Volumen 18, 2012 Volumen 17, 2011 Volumen 16, 2010 Volumen 15, 2009 Volumen 14, 2008 Volumen 13, 2007 Volumen 12, 2006 Volumen 11, 2005 Volumen 10, 2004 Volumen 9, 2003 Volumen 8, 2002 Volumen 7, 2001 Volumen 6, 2000 Volumen 5, 1999 Volumen 4, 1998 Volumen 3, 1997 Volumen 2, 1995 Volumen 1, 1994

Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering

DOI: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2020029186
pages 155-175

NETWORK MARGINALIZATION OF WOMEN IN THE WORKPLACE: A CASE IN ACADEMIA

Christina D. Falci
Department of Sociology, University of Nebraska – Lincoln, 714 Oldfather Hall, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0324, USA
Megumi Watanabe
Office of University Strategy, Hiroshima University, 1-3-2 Kagamiyama Higashihiroshima, Hiroshima 739-8511, Japan

SINOPSIS

This research explores gender differences in the local (e.g., network size) and global (e.g., nestedness) structure of a faculty member's network across three types of workplace relationships. Applying network and social psychological theories, we hypothesize that women will experience marginalization within informal network ties, including research and friendship. In contrast, we do not expect any gender differences in formal networks connections measured as committee comembership. Using survey data drawn from faculty within 22 STEM departments at a large Midwestern Research I university, we find that faculty women have smaller research and friendship networks than men. Moreover, women are more likely than men to reside on the periphery relative to being in the core of research and friendship networks. We find no gender differences in the network structure of committee comembership networks. Across informal and formal networks, we further find no gender differences in a faculty member's connection to central actors in the network (i.e., recursive centrality).

PALABRAS CLAVE: gender, work, faculty, networks

REFERENCIAS

  1. Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C.A., & Murgia, G. (2013). Gender differences in research collaboration. Journal of Infometrics, 7(4), 811-822. .

  2. American Association for Public Opinion Research [AAPOR]. (2016). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (9th ed.). Lenexa, KS: AAPOR. .

  3. Bain, O., & Cummings, W. (2000). Academe's glass ceiling: Societal, professional-organizational and institutional barriers to the career advancement of academic women. Comparative Education Review, 44(4), 493-545. .

  4. Biancani, S. M., & McFarland, D. A. (2013). Social networks research in higher education. In M.B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 151-215). New York: Springer. .

  5. Bianchi, S. M., & Milkie, M. A. (2010). Work and family research in the first decade of the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 705-725. .

  6. Bird, S. (2011). Unsettling universities' incongruous, gendered bureaucratic structures: A case study approach. Gender, Work & Occupations, 18(2), 202-230. .

  7. Blair-Loy, M., & Wharton, A. S. (2002). Employees' use of work-family policies and the workplace social context. Social Forces, 80(3), 813-845. .

  8. Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. New York: Free Press. .

  9. Bonacich, P. (1972). Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2, 113-120. .

  10. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of social capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood Press. .

  11. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. .

  12. Borgatti, S. (2004). Testing network hypotheses. Retrieved from http://www.analytictech.com/essex/lectures/hypotheses.pdf. .

  13. Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers. Research Policy, 40(10), 1393-402. .

  14. Brewer, D. D. (2000). Forgetting the recall-based elicitation of personal and social networks. Social Networks, 22(1), 29-43. .

  15. Burt, R. S. (1998). The gender of social capital. Rationality and Society, 10(1), 5-46. .

  16. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge. .

  17. Bystydzienski, J. M., & Bird, S. R. (2006). Removing barriers: Women in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. .

  18. Carr, R. (2013). Women in the academic pipeline for science, technology, engineering and math: Nationally and at AAUDE institutions. Nashville, TN: Association of American Universities Data Exchange. .

  19. Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. Cambridge: Polity Press. .

  20. Collins, R., & Steffen-Fluhr, N. (2019). Hidden patterns: Using social network analysis to track career trajectories of women STEM faculty. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 38(2), 265-282. .

  21. Crossley, N. (2010). Networks and complexity: Directions for interactionist research? Symbolic Interaction, 33(3), 341-363 .

  22. Curtis, J. W. (2011). Persistent inequity: Gender and academic employment. American Association of University Professors. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/08E023AB-E6D8-4DBD-99A0-24E5EB73A760/0/persistent_inequity.pdf. .

  23. Deal, J. E., & Anderson, E. R. (1995). Reporting and interpreting results in family research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 1040-1048. .

  24. DiRamio, D., Theroux, R., & Guarino, A. J. (2009). Faculty hiring at top-ranked higher education administration programs: An examination using social network analysis. Innovative Higher Education, 34, 149-159. .

  25. Drago, R. W., & Williams, J. (2000). A half-time tenure track proposal. Challenge: The Magazine ofHigher Learning, 32, 46-51. .

  26. Edgington, E. S., & Onghena, P. (2007). Randomization tests (4th ed). New York: Taylor & Francis. .

  27. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24(2), 149-166. .

  28. Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., & Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena unbound: The advancement of women in science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .

  29. Evans, T. S., Lambiotte, R., & Panzarasa, P. (2011). Community structure and patterns of scientific collaboration in business and management. Scientometrics, 89(1), 381-396. .

  30. Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 357-411). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. .

  31. Fiske, S. T. (2011). Envy up, scorn down: How status divides us. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. .

  32. Forret, M. L., & Dougherty, T. W. (2004). Networking behaviors and career outcomes: differences for men and women? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 419-437. .

  33. Fox, M. F. (2010). Women and men faculty in academic science and engineering: Social-organizational indicators and implications. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(7), 997-1012. .

  34. Gatta, M. L., & Roos, P. A. (2004). Balancing without a net in academia: Integrating family and work lives. Equal Opportunities International, 23(3-5), 124-142. .

  35. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491-512. .

  36. Gorman, E. H. (2005). Gender stereotypes, same-gender preferences, and organizational variation in the hiring of women: Evidence from law firms. American Sociological Review, 70, 702-728. .

  37. Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201-233. .

  38. Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside. Digital textbook retrieved from http://faculty.ucr.edu/~hanneman/. .

  39. Hirshfield, L. E., & Joseph, T. D. (2010). We need a woman, we need a black woman: Gender, race, and identity taxation in the academy. Gender and Education, 24(2), 213-227. .

  40. Hunter, L., & Leahey, E. (2008). Collaborative research in sociology: Trends and contributing factors. The American Sociologist, 39(4), 290-306. .

  41. Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 18, 46-87. .

  42. Irvine, L., & Vermilya, J. R. (2010). Gender work in a feminized profession: The case of veterinary medicine. Gender & Society, 24(1), 56-82. .

  43. Jacobs, J. A., & Winslow, S. E. (2004). The academic life course, time pressures and gender inequality. Community, Work & Family, 7(2), 143-161. .

  44. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books, Inc. .

  45. Knoke, D., & Yang, S. (2008). Social network analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. .

  46. Kossinets, G. (2006). Effects of missing data in social networks. Social Networks, 28(3), 247-268. .

  47. Krackhardt, D. (1988). Predicting with networks: A multiple regression approach to analyzing dyadic data. Social Networks, 10, 359-381. .

  48. Kyvik, S., & Teigen, M. (1996). Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(1), 54-71. .

  49. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Merton, R. K. (1954). Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In M. Berger (Ed.), Freedom and control in modern society (pp.18-66). New York: Van Nostrand. .

  50. Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. New York: Cambridge University Press. .

  51. Long, J. S., & Fox, M. F. (1995). Scientific careers: Universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 45-71. .

  52. Long, Z. A., Buzzanell, P. M., Kokini, K., Wilson, R. F., Batra, J. C., & Anderson, L. B. (2018). Mentoring women and minority faculty in engineering: A multidimensional mentoring network approach. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 24, 121-145. .

  53. Louch, H. (2000). Personal network integration: Transitivity and homophily in strongtie relations. Social Networks, 22, 45-64. .

  54. Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA: Belknap/ Harvard University Press. .

  55. Mallery, T. A., Mittman, I. S., Castillo-Page, L., Eliason, J., & Chapman Navarro, J. R. (2019). A stochastic model of consensus reaching in committee decisions for faculty advancement, promotion and tenure: Does diversity matter? Journal of the National Medical Association, 111(4), 418-426. .

  56. Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122-131. .

  57. Martin, P. Y. (2003). 'Said and done' verses 'saying and doing': Gendering practices, practicing gender at work. Gender & Society, 17, 342-366. .

  58. Marschke, R., Laursen, S., Nielsen, J. M., & Dunn-Rankin, P. (2007). Demographic inertia revisited: An immodest proposal to achieve equitable gender representation among faculty in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(1), 1-26. .

  59. Mason, M. A., Wolfinger, N. H., & Goulden, M. (2013). Do babies matter?: Gender and family in the ivory tower. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. .

  60. McDowell, J. M., & Smith, J. K. (1992). The effect of gender-sorting on propensity to coauthor: Implications for academic promotions. Economic Inquiry, 30(1), 68-82. .

  61. McGuire, G. M., & Reskin, B. (1993). Authority hierarchies at work: The impacts of race and sex. Gender & Society, 7(4), 487-506. .

  62. McGuire, G. M. (2000). Gender, race, ethnicity, and networks: The factors affecting the status of employees' network members. Work and Occupations, 27(4), 501-523. .

  63. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444. .

  64. McPherson, M., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1987). Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status distance and the composition of face-to-face groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 370-379. .

  65. Mehta, C. M., & Strough, J. (2009). Sex segregation in friendships and normative contexts across the life span. Developmental Review, 29(3), 201-220. .

  66. Monroe, K., Ozyurt, S., Wrigley, T., & Alexander, A. (2008). Gender equality in academia: Bad news from the trenches, and some possible solutions. Perspectives on Politics, 6(2), 215-233. .

  67. Mook, D., Wellman, B., & Carrasco, J. (2010). Does distance matter in the age of the internet? Urban Studies, 47(13), 2747-2783. .

  68. Moody, J. (2000). SPAN: SAS programs for analyzing networks. Unpublished Manual. .

  69. Moody, J., & White, D. R. (2003). Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review, 68, 103-127. .

  70. Moore, K. M., & Sagaria, M. A. D. (1993). The situation of women in research universities in the United States: Within the inner circles of academic power. In B. K. Townsend (Ed.), Women in Higher Education: A Feminist Perspective (pp. 185-200). Needham Heights, MA: Ginn Press. .

  71. National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Full-time faculty in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by race/ethnicity, sex and academic rank: Fall 2009, Fall 2011, and Fall 2013. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d14/tables/dt14_315.20.asp. .

  72. Neal, Z. (2011). Differentiating centrality and power in the world city network. Urban Studies, 48(13), 2733-2748. .

  73. Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude you're a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkley, CA: University of California Press. .

  74. Preston, A. E. (2004). Leaving science: Occupational exit from scientific careers. New York: NY: Russell Sage Foundation. .

  75. Pyke, K. (2011). Service and gender inequity among faculty. Political Science & Politics, 44(1), 85-87. .

  76. Rausch, D., Ortiz, B., Douthitt, R., & Reed, L. (1989). The academic revolving door: Why do women get caught? CUPA Journal, 40(1), 1-16. .

  77. Realff, M. L., Colatrella, C., & Fox, M. F. (2007). Interconnected networks for advancement in science and engineering. In A. J. Stewart, J. E. Malley, & D., LaVaque-Manty (Eds.), Transforming science and engineering: Advancing academic women (pp. 62-78). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. .

  78. Reskin, B. F. (2000). The proximate causes of employment discrimination. Contemporary Sociology, 29(2), 319-328. .

  79. Ridgeway, C. (2014). Why status matters for inequality. American Sociological Review, 79(1), 1-16. .

  80. Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510-531. .

  81. Ridgeway, C. L. (2009). Framed before we know it: How gender shapes social relations. Gender & Society, 23, 145-160. .

  82. Rich, A. C. (2003). Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence (1980). Journal of Women's History, 15(3), 11-48. .

  83. Roth, L. M. (2004a). Bringing clients back in: Homophily preferences and inequality on Wall Street. Sociological Quarterly, 45(4), 613-635. .

  84. Roth, L. M. (2004b). The social psychology of tokenism: Status and homophily processes on Wall Street. Sociological Perspectives, 47(2), 189-214. .

  85. Roos, P. A., & Gatta, M. L. (2009). Gender (in)equity in the academy: Subtle mechanisms and the production of inequality. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 27(3), 177-200. .

  86. Seibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 219-237. .

  87. Schilt, K., & Westbrook, L. (2009). Doing gender, doing heteronormativity: 'Gender normals,' transgender people, and the social maintenance of heterosexuality. Gender & Society, 23(4), 440-464. .

  88. Smith, J. W., & Calasanti, T. (2005). The influence of gender, race, and ethnicity on workplace experiences of institutional and social isolation: An exploratory study of university faculty. Sociological Spectrum, 25(3), 307-334. .

  89. Smith-Doerr, L. (2004). Flexibility and fairness: Effects of the network form of organization on gender equity in life science careers. Sociological Perspectives, 47, 25-54. .

  90. Steffen-Fluhr, N., Gruzd, A., Collins, R., & Osatuyi, B. (2010). N is for network: New tools for mapping organizational change. Paper presented at the National Association of Multicultural Engineering Program Advocates (NAMEPA)/Women in Engineering Program Advocates Network (WEPAN) 4th Joint Conference. Retrieved from https://dalspace.library.dal.ca/bitstream/handle/10222/12827/N_is_ for_Network_WEPAN2010_sm.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. .

  91. Steinpreis, R. E., Anders, K. A., & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41(7-8), 509-528. .

  92. Stichman, A. J., Hassell, K. D., & Archbold, C. A. (2010). Strength in numbers? A test of Kanter's theory of tokenism. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 633-639. .

  93. Taylor, C. J. (2010). Occupational sex composition and the gendered availability of workplace support. Gender & Society, 24(2), 189-212. .

  94. Trix, F., & Psenka, C. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society, 14(2), 191-220. .

  95. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. .

  96. West, M.S., & Curtis, J.W. (2006). Faculty gender equity indicators. American Association of University Professors. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/63396944-44BE-4ABA-9815- 5792D93856F1/0/AAUPGenderEquityIndicators2006.pdf. .

  97. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, 125-151. .

  98. White, H. D. (2011). Scientific and scholarly networks. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 271-285). London: Sage. .

  99. White, W. J. (1999). Academic topographies a network analysis of disciplinarity among communication faculty. Human Communication Research, 25, 604-617. .

  100. Wingfield, A. H. (2008). Racializing the glass escalator: Reconsidering men's experiences with women's work. Gender & Society, 23(1), 5-26. .

  101. Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the "female" professions. Social Problems, 39, 253-267. .

  102. Williams, C. L. (2013). The glass escalator, revisited gender inequality in neoliberal times, SWS Feminist Lecturer. Gender & Society, 27(5), 609-629. .

  103. Yoder, J. D. (1994). Looking beyond numbers: The effects of gender status, job prestige, and occupational gender-typing on tokenism processes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 150-159. .

  104. Yoder, J. D. (1991). Rethinking tokenism: Looking beyond numbers. Gender and Society, 5, 178-192. .

  105. Zimmer, L. (1988). Tokenism and women in the workplace: The limits of gender-neutral theory. Social Problems, 35, 64-77. .


Articles with similar content:

STUDENTS' SCIENCE ATTITUDES IN THE PERFORMANCE-BASED CLASSROOM: DID WE CLOSE THE GENDER GAP?
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, Vol.4, 1998, issue 2&3
Jasna Jovanovic, Candice Dreves
EXPLORING LATINA FIRST-GENERATION COLLEGE STUDENTS’ MULTIPLE IDENTITIES, SELF-EFFICACY, AND INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRATION TO INFORM ACHIEVEMENT IN ENGINEERING
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, Vol.24, 2018, issue 3
Allison Godwin, Dina Verdin
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD SCIENCE: RESEARCH AND INTERVENTION
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, Vol.1, 1994, issue 4
Robert L. Ziomek, Sandra L. Stephen, Terry F. McNabb, Elizabeth Dunkman Riesz
AFRICAN AMERICAN MALES' EXPERIENCES ON MULTIRACIAL STUDENT TEAMS IN ENGINEERING
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, Vol.26, 2020, issue 4
Kelly J. Cross, Marie C. Paretti
Abstract of "New Tools to Address Responsible Conduct of Nanobiotechnological Research"
Journal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants, Vol.18, 2008, issue 1
Daniel A. Vallero