Gender in Engineering Departments: Are There Gender Differences in Interruptions of Academic Job Talks?

Mary Blair-Loy, Laura E. Rogers, Daniela Glaser, Y. L. Anne Wong, Danielle Abraham and Pamela C. Cosman
Additional contact information
Mary Blair-Loy: Department of Sociology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
Laura E. Rogers: Department of Sociology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
Daniela Glaser: Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA
Y. L. Anne Wong: Department of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA
Danielle Abraham: Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes, 445 Marine View Ave #290, Del Mar, CA 92014, USA
Pamela C. Cosman: Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA

Social Sciences, 2017, vol. 6, issue 1, 1-19

Abstract: We use a case study of job talks in five engineering departments to analyze the under-studied area of gendered barriers to finalists for faculty positions. We focus on one segment of the interview day of short-listed candidates invited to campus: the “job talk”, when candidates present their original research to the academic department. We analyze video recordings of 119 job talks across five engineering departments at two Research 1 universities. Specifically, we analyze whether there are differences by gender or by years of post-Ph.D. experience in the number of interruptions, follow-up questions, and total questions that job candidates receive. We find that, compared to men, women receive more follow-up questions and more total questions. Moreover, a higher proportion of women’s talk time is taken up by the audience asking questions. Further, the number of questions is correlated with the job candidate’s statements and actions that reveal he or she is rushing to present their slides and complete the talk. We argue that women candidates face more interruptions and often have less time to bring their talk to a compelling conclusion, which is connected to the phenomenon of “stricter standards” of competence demanded by evaluators of short-listed women applying for a masculine-typed job. We conclude with policy recommendations.

Keywords: gender; STEM; interruptions; job talks; gender bias; faculty hiring; underrepresentation of women; women in science; double standards; stricter standards (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A B N P Y80 Z00 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/1/29/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/1/29/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:1:p:29-:d:93003

Access Statistics for this article

Social Sciences is currently edited by Ms. Yvonne Chu

More articles in Social Sciences from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().