The Climate for Women in Academic Science: The Good, the Bad, and the Changeable

TLDR

Deficits theory posits that women scientists have not yet achieved parity with men scientists because of structural aspects of the scientific environment that provide them with fewer opportunities and more obstacles than men. The study aimed to test deficits theory by examining how personal negative experiences and workplace climate perceptions affect job satisfaction, influence, and productivity among 208 faculty women scientists. The authors surveyed 208 faculty women scientists, measuring negative experiences, climate perceptions, and outcomes such as job satisfaction, influence, and productivity. Regression analysis showed that sexual harassment and gender discrimination were linked to poorer job outcomes, while a positive, nonsexist climate and effective leadership were associated with better outcomes, suggesting implications for retention and career success.

Abstract

Deficits theory posits that women scientists have not yet achieved parity with men scientists because of structural aspects of the scientific environment that provide them with fewer opportunities and more obstacles than men. The current study of 208 faculty women scientists tested this theory by examining the effect of personal negative experiences and perceptions of the workplace climate on job satisfaction, felt influence, and productivity. Hierarchical multiple regression results indicated that women scientists experiencing more sexual harassment and gender discrimination reported poorer job outcomes. Additionally, perceptions of a generally positive, nonsexist climate, as well as effective leadership, were related to positive job outcomes after controlling for harassment and discrimination. We discuss implications for the retention and career success of women in academic science.