Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 21;12(3):e054769. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054769.
Amidst growing numbers of women in certain areas of medicine (eg, general practice/primary care), yet their continued under-representation in others (eg, surgical specialties), this study examines (1) whether medical professionals mistakenly infer that women are now broadly well represented, overestimating women's representation in several different areas and roles; and (2) whether this overestimation of women's representation predicts decreased support for gender equality initiatives in the field, in conjunction with one's own gender.
Cross-sectional survey.
UK-based medical field.
425 UK medical consultants/general practitioners and trainees (ST/CT1+/SHO/Registrar); 47% were female.
Estimates of women's representation in different areas/roles within medicine, examined as a composite estimate and individually; and a multi-item measure of support for gender-based initiatives in medicine.
Medical professionals tended to overestimate women's true representation in several different areas of medicine (general practice, medical specialties, surgical specialties) and in various roles (consultants/general practitioners, trainees, medical school graduates). Moreover, these erroneous estimates predicted a decreased willingness to support gender-based initiatives, particularly among men in the field: composite overestimation*respondent gender interaction, =-0.04, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.01, p=0.01. Specifically, while female respondents' (over)estimates were unrelated to their level of support (=0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02, p=0.92), male respondents' tendency to overestimate the proportion of women in medicine predicted lower support for gender-based initiatives (=-0.04, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.02, p<0.001).
While some progress has been made in gender representation in the medical field, this research illustrates that there are still barriers to gender equality efforts and identifies who within the field is focally maintaining these barriers. It is those individuals (particularly men) who overestimate the progress that has been made in women's representation who are at highest risk of undermining it.
在某些医学领域(如全科/初级保健)中女性人数不断增加,但在其他领域(如外科专业)中女性的代表性仍然不足,本研究考察了(1)医学专业人员是否错误地推断女性现在广泛得到充分代表,高估了女性在几个不同领域和角色中的代表性;以及(2)这种对女性代表性的高估是否与个人自身性别一起,预测对该领域性别平等举措的支持减少。
横断面调查。
英国医疗领域。
425 名英国医学顾问/全科医生和学员(ST/CT1+/SHO/注册医师);47%为女性。
医学领域内不同领域/角色中女性代表性的估计值,作为综合估计值和个别估计值进行检查;以及对医学领域基于性别的举措的支持的多项措施。
医学专业人员往往高估了女性在医学的几个不同领域(全科医学、医学专业、外科专业)和各种角色(顾问/全科医生、学员、医学院毕业生)中的真实代表性。此外,这些错误的估计值预测了对基于性别的举措的支持意愿降低,特别是在该领域的男性中:综合高估*受访者性别交互作用,=-0.04,95%CI -0.07 至-0.01,p=0.01。具体来说,虽然女性受访者的(过高)估计值与他们的支持水平无关(=0.00,95%CI -0.02 至 0.02,p=0.92),但男性受访者高估女性在医学中的比例的趋势预测了对基于性别的举措的较低支持(=-0.04,95%CI -0.06 至-0.02,p<0.001)。
尽管在医学领域的性别代表性方面取得了一些进展,但这项研究表明,性别平等努力仍存在障碍,并确定了该领域内谁是这些障碍的主要维护者。正是那些(特别是男性)高估了女性代表性所取得的进展的人,最有可能破坏这种进展。