Differences in Applying Gender Double Standards to STEM Careers through Narratives

The purpose of this thesis was to explore further reasons for the underrepresentation of women in STEM careers, by determining whether there were differences in perception of STEM careers based on gender double standards and motivational environment. Participants were asked to read one of four narratives featuring a graduate student in a STEM field. Each narrative differed across two manipulated variables: the gender of the main character, and whether it was an individualist or collaborative motivational environment. After reading the narrative, participants evaluated the character’s traits using masculine and feminine characteristics (Bem, 1974), as well as their perceived likability and ability in their career. We also asked participants a series of other measures that included their personal interest and opinions in STEM careers. Results included a main effect of character gender on perceived femininity and likability, and of motivational environment on perceived masculinity. Results also suggested that men were perceived to be more typical in an individualistic environment, while women were perceived as more typical in a collaborative environment and a similar trend emerged for perceptions of success. These findings, which confirm the influence of gender and also further evidence of the effect of motivational environment, provide several implications for differences in perception of STEM careers, and women’s interest in pursuing them. APPLYING DOUBLE STANDARDS TO STEM CAREER NARRATIVES 3 Acknowledgments I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Melanie Green, for her patience and guidance throughout the thesis process, and for all the inspiration she has provided for me during my time in her lab. I would also like to give special thanks to Dr. Steven Buzinski and Keenan Jenkins, for serving on my Honors Committee and for their helpful feedback. I want to thank everyone in the Green Lab for their help acquainting me with the lab equipment, for their constructive feedback on my research, and for making me feel like a welcome part of the lab since day one. I would like to give special acknowledgements to Dr. Nalin Parikh and Dean Harold Woodard for heading the Duke Energy Bioscience Scholars (DEBS) and Science and Math Achievement and Resourcefulness Track (SMART) programs, which had introduced me into undergraduate research and fostered my continued interest throughout college. I would also like to acknowledge the Corbin Jones lab -with special thanks to my advisor Dr. Corbin Jones and my mentor Josie Reinhardt -for their help and guidance during my time in the lab for DEBS and SMART. Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, Oluseye and Obakeye Coker, my sister Olutoyosi Coker, and my amazing friends, for their encouragement and support throughout my years at UNC, as they have always provided in my life. APPLYING DOUBLE STANDARDS TO STEM CAREER NARRATIVES 4 Differences in Applying Gender Double Standards to STEM Careers through Narratives A large and continuously growing amount of research in psychology has been dedicated to gender roles. Some studies have focused more closely on double standards that are created and perpetuated by gender stereotypes, as well as how people apply them in their lives. Double standards can be defined as social norms and expectations that, while viewed as acceptable for one group, might be viewed as unacceptable for the other. An area where gender stereotypes and double standards have long been prevalent is within the workforce, and the discrepancy in the amount of women working in certain fields of study is of particular interest to researchers. Women in STEM Careers Although women in general have successfully branched out to careers that had been previously dominated by men, women are still underrepresented in careers associated within the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) (Diekman, Brown, Johnston, & Clark, 2010). According to Diekman et al., this discrepancy is not due to some general trend for male-dominant fields; women have made much more significant gains in studying medicine and law, as an example of prior male-dominant careers, compared to women studying a STEM field (Diekman et al., 2010). Rather, the researchers proposed that a reason for the discrepancy may be due to a perception that STEM careers lack the opportunity for communal goals -that is, the ability to work with or help other people -a more notable trait in traditionally feminine careers as well as in medicine and law. Researchers tested this hypothesis by obtaining self-reported survey information from college students in introductory psychology classes, on measures that included their goal endorsements, career interests, and self-efficacy (Diekman et al., 2010). Diekman’s research team found that APPLYING DOUBLE STANDARDS TO STEM CAREER NARRATIVES 5 indeed, women perceived STEM careers to inhibit communal goals more than men, particularly those that highly endorse those goals in their self-reports. Results from this study offer a few key observations to consider. One main observation is that the motivation to adopt a communal role has a clear effect on women, and what may drive them to steer away from STEM careers that they perceive to inhibit those goals, even for those women that have the ability to perform just as well as their male counterparts (Diekman, 2010). The researchers express the need to help individuals considering STEM careers, particularly women, understand that those career choices aren’t necessary devoid of communal goals. Rather, many STEM careers provide the opportunity to collaborate with others and ultimately help others. It is important that women understand this in making their career choice, and not hold on to the “perceived misalignment between STEM and communal goals” (Diekman et al., 2010, p. 1056). Gender Roles and Double Standards The results from the Diekman study, and their implications about women’s reasons to steer away from STEM careers, have little to with applying double standards to the women themselves, but rather on the women’s explicit and implicit attitudes about STEM careers. Nonetheless, their results, and prior findings that had been used to develop their hypothesis -that women value communal goals more than men -is a testament to why some stereotypes for double standards persist. Namely, the fact that there may be some truth to these stereotypes regarding what is typical of women compared to men. Furthermore, the basis for most gender double standards are the stereotypes traditionally attributed to both men and women. In particular, prior studies have found that many double standards derive from roles and traits that are associated with and, more often than not, observed APPLYING DOUBLE STANDARDS TO STEM CAREER NARRATIVES 6 within each gender. For example, if men are generally viewed to be assertive and strong, they should be expected to act that way (Prentice & Carrenza, 2003). The same circumstance could be said for women and the general view and expectation that they should be caring and gentle, and that this perhaps stereotypical behavior would be applied in their daily lives, such as in their ideal career choices. Additionally, previous studies concerning gender roles have been carried out, such as the early keystone studies conducted by Bem on psychological androgyny, or the blending of both masculine and feminine traits (1974). Bem focused on gender roles to define what is considered masculine and feminine, and her findings led to the development of a list of 60 characteristics based on traditional gender roles, known as the Bem Sex Role Inventory (1974). This list was originally developed as a method used to independently apply masculine and feminine characteristics to a person, such as “self-reliant” and “understanding,” respectively (Bem, 1974). Rather than having merely two classifications, the inventory allows for people to be characterized as one of four distinct gender-role orientations: masculine, feminine, androgynous, or undifferentiated. It should be noted, however, that while the inventory includes positive gender traits, it also includes negative traits for each gender, such “gullible” being a feminine trait, and “aggressive” being masculine (Bem, 1974). The Bem Sex Role Inventory has been of interest for studies involving not only gender stereotypes, but for testing the validity and application of the characteristics in modern society, where there has been a large advancement toward gender equality. Prentice and Carrenza (2003) tested the validity of those traits pulled from the inventory (1974) by asking male and female college students to report not only the typicality of these gender traits, but also the desirability of those traits in both genders. Their goal was to determine whether or not there would be a gender APPLYING DOUBLE STANDARDS TO STEM CAREER NARRATIVES 7 difference in how certain traits are typical, desirable, and/or acceptable. Their results revealed a general overlap of both typicality and desirability, for most positive and negative traits, that differed significantly for each gender (Prentice & Carrenza, 2003). Although Prentice and Carrenza (2003) had not necessarily focused on the application of double standards, such results reveal the complex, and perhaps unconscious, nature of assigning certain traits to each gender. They not only further support the validity of the Bem Sex Role Inventory (1974), but also help support reasons for the persistence of gender stereotypes. Use of Double Standards Not surprisingly, stereotypes based on the more negative traits -and double standards that stem from those stereotypes – are also unfair for the target gender, such as the idea that women are normally weak, and that men tend to be violent. Though many of these double standards would be considered archaic in nature, they still persist and seem to have influence in people’s lives. This is clearly n