Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-kjzhn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-04T02:03:21.884Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strategies for Improving Gender Diversity in the Methods Community: Insights from Political Methodologists and Social Science Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2018

Tiffany D. Barnes
Tiffany D. Barnes*
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
Symposium: What is a Political Methodologist?
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , July 2018 , pp. 580 - 587
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Baird, Chardie L. 2008. “The Importance of Community Context for Young Women’s Occupational Aspirations.” Sex Roles 58 (3-4): 208–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, Chardie L. 2012. “Going Against the Flow: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Cognitive Skills and Gender Beliefs on Occupational Aspirations and Outcomes.” Sociological Forum 27 (4): 986–1009.Google Scholar
Baird, Chardie L. 2018. “Women and STEM.” Instrumentation and Measurement Society Magazine. Available at http://ieee-ims.org/publications/im-magazine.Google Scholar
Barnes, Tiffany D., and Beaulieu, Emily. 2017. “Engaging Women: Addressing the Gender Gap in Women’s Networking and Productivity.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50 (2): 461–6.Google Scholar
Beaulieu, Emily, Boydstun, Amber, Brown, Nadia, Dionne, Kim Yi, Gillespie, Andra, Klar, Samara, Krupnikov, Yanna, Michelson, Melissa R., Searles, Kathleen, and Wolbrecht, Christina. Forthcoming. 2017. “Women Also Know Stuff: Meta-Level Mentoring to Battle Gender Bias in Political Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50 (3): 779–83.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy, Folke, Olle, Persson, Torsten, and Rickne, Johanna. 2017. “Gender Quotas and the Crisis of the Mediocre Man.” American Economic Review 107 (8): 2204–42.Google Scholar
Bian, Lin, Leslie, Sarah-Jane, and Cimpian, Andrei. 2017. “Gender Stereotypes about Intellectual Ability Emerge Early and Influence Children’s Interests.” Science 355: 389–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, David E., and Wolbrecht, Christina. 2006. “See Jane Run: Women Politicians as Role Models for Adolescents.” Journal of Politics 68 (2): 233–47.Google Scholar
Cassese, Erin, and Holman, Mirya R.. 2018. “Writing as Community: Peer-to-Peer Mentoring as a Mechanism for Productivity and Support among Junior Scholars.” PS: Political Science & Politics. Online First. DOI: 10.1017/S1049096517002049.Google Scholar
Cassese, Erin, Holman, Mirya R., Schneider, Monica C., and Bos, Angela L.. 2015. “Building a Gender and Methodology Curriculum: Integrated Skills, Exercises, and Practices.” Journal of Political Science Education 11 (1): 61–77.Google Scholar
Cimpian, Andrei, and Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2015. “Response to Comment on ‘Expectations of Brilliance Underlie Gender Distributions across Academic Disciplines.’” Science 349 (6246): 391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cvencek, Dario, Meltzoff, Andrew N., and Greenwald, Anthony G.. 2011. “Math-Gender Stereotypes in Elementary School Children.” Child Development 82 (3): 766–79.Google Scholar
Czudnowski, Moshe M. 1975. “Political Recruitment.” In Handbook of Political Science: Micropolitical Theory, ed. Greenstein, Fred I. and Nelson, W. Polsby, vol. 2. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Nilanjana. 2011. “In-Group Experts and Peers as Social Vaccines Who Inoculate the Self-Concept: The Stereotype-Inoculation Model.” Psychological Inquiry 22 (4): 231–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dion, Michelle. 2014. “An Effort to Increase Women’s Participation: The Visions in Methodology Initiative.” The Political Methodologist 21 (2): 6.Google Scholar
Dion, Michelle, Sumner, Jane Lawrence, and Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin. Forthcoming. “Gendered Citation Patterns across Political Science and Social Science Methodology Fields.” Political Analysis.Google Scholar
Dweck, Carol S. 2006. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Erhardt, Niclas L., Werbel, James D., and Shrader, Charles B.. 2003. “Board of Director Diversity and Firm Financial Performance.” Corporate Governance: An International Review 11 (2): 102–11.Google Scholar
Esarey, Justin. 2018. “What Makes Someone a Political Methodologist?” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (3): this issue.Google Scholar
Galdi, Silvia, Cadinu, Mara, and Tomasetto, Carlo. 2014. “The Roots of Stereotype Threat: When Automatic Associations Disrupt Girls’ Math Performance.” Child Development 85 (1): 250–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzig, Abbe H. 2004. “Becoming Mathematicians: Women and Students of Color Choosing and Leaving Doctoral Mathematics.” Review of Educational Research 74 (2): 171–214.Google Scholar
Hong, Lu, and Page, Scott E.. 2004. “Groups of Diverse Problem Solvers Can Outperform Groups of High-Ability Problem Solvers.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (24): 16385–9.Google Scholar
Ladam, Christina, Harden, Jeffery J., and Windett, Jason H.. 2018. “Prominent Role Models: High-Profile Female Politicians and the Emergence of Women as Candidates for Public Office.” American Journal of Political Science. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12351.Google Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Fox, Richard L.. 2005. It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane, Cimpian, Andrei, Meyer, Meredith, and Freeland, Edward. 2015. “Expectations of Brilliance Underlie Gender Distributions across Academic Disciplines.” Science 34 (6219): 262–5.Google Scholar
Levine, Mindy, Serio, Nicole, Radaram, Bhasker, Chaudhuri, Sauradip, and Talbert, William. 2015. “Addressing the STEM Gender Gap by Designing and Implementing an Educational Outreach Chemistry Camp for Middle-School Girls.” Journal of Chemical Education 92 (10): 1639–44.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, Mercedes, Crouch, Catherine H., and Mazur, Eric. 2006. “Reducing the Gender Gap in the Physics Classroom.” American Journal of Physics 74 (2): 118–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lückerath-Rovers, Mijntje. 2013. “Women on Boards and Firm Performance.” Journal of Management & Governance 17 (2): 491–509.Google Scholar
Marx, David M., and Roman, Jasmin S.. 2002. “Female Role Models: Protecting Women’s Math Test Performance.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (9): 1183–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPherson, Miller, Smith-Lovin, Lynn, and Cook, James. 2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27 (1): 415–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Patrice M., Danaher, Dorothy L., and Forbes, David. 1986. “Sex-Related Strategies for Coping with Interpersonal Conflict in Children Aged Five and Seven.” Developmental Psychology 22 (4): 543–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin, Lange, Samantha, and Brus, Holly. 2013. “Gendered Citation Patterns in International Relations Journals.” International Studies Perspectives 14 (4): 485–92.Google Scholar
Mohr, Tara Sophia. 2014. “Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified.” Harvard Business Review, August 25. https://hbr.org/2014/08/why-women-dont-apply-for-jobs-unless-theyre-100-qualified.Google Scholar
Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., Dovidio, John F., Brescoll, Victoria L., Graham, Mark J., and Handelsman, Jo. 2012. “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (41): 16474–9.Google Scholar
Murphy, Mary C., Steele, Claude M., and Gross, James J.. 2007. “Signaling Threat: How Situational Cues Affect Women in Math, Science, and Engineering Settings.” Psychological Science 18 (10): 879–85.Google Scholar
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2017. “Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2017.” Arlington, VA: Special Report NSF 17-310. Available at www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd.Google Scholar
Reskin, Barbara F., and McBrier, Debra Branch. 2000. “Why Not Ascription? Organizations’ Employment of Male and Female Managers.” American Sociological Review 65 (2): 210–33.Google Scholar
Roberts, Margaret. 2018. “Political Methodology and Comparative Politics.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (3): this issue.Google Scholar
Rudman, Laurie A. 1998. “Self-Promotion as a Risk Factor for Women: The Costs and Benefits of Counter-Stereotypical Impression Management.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (3): 629.Google Scholar
Schneider, Monica C., Holman, Mirya R., Diekman, Amanda B., and McAndrew, Thomas. 2016. “Power, Conflict, and Community: How Gendered Views of Political Power Influence Women’s Political Ambition.” Political Psychology 37 (4): 515–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shames, Shauna L., and Wise, Tess. 2017. “Gender, Diversity, and Methods in Political Science: A Theory of Selection and Survival Biases.” PS: Political Science & Politics 50 (3): 811–23.Google Scholar
Spencer, Steven J., Steele, Claude M., and Quinn, Diane M.. 1999. “Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35 (1): 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stauffer, Katelyn E., and O’Brien, Diana Z.. 2018. “Fast Friends or Strange Bedfellows: Quantitative Methods and Gender and Politics Research.” Indiana University: Working Paper.Google Scholar
Steele, Claude M. 1997. “A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Performance.” American Psychologist 52 (6): 613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, Rong, Rounds, James, and Armstrong, Patrick Ian. 2009. “Men and Things, Women and People: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Interests.” Psychological Bulletin 135 (6): 859–84.Google Scholar
Sumner, Jane Lawrence. 2018. “The GBAT: A Web-Based Tool for Estimating Gender Balance in Syllabi and Bibliographies.” PS: Political Science & Politics 51 (2): 396–400.Google Scholar
Tinto, Vincent. 1993. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Uhlmann, Eric Luis, and Cohen, Geoffrey L.. 2005. “Constructed Criteria: Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination.” Psychological Science 16 (6): 474–80.Google Scholar
Unkovic, Cait, Sen, Maya, and Quinn, Kevin M.. 2016. “Does Encouragement Matter in Improving Gender Imbalances in Technical Fields? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial.” PLoS ONE 11 (4): e0151714. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0151714.Google Scholar
Wood, Wendy, and Eagly, Alice H.. 2012. “Biosocial Construction of Sex Differences and Similarities in Behavior.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 46 (1): 55–123.Google Scholar