• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

变革杠杆:运用数学模型比较大学中的性别平等干预措施

Levers of change: using mathematical models to compare gender equity interventions in universities.

作者信息

James Alex, Brower Ann

机构信息

School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Aotearoa, New Zealand.

School of Earth and Environment, University of Canterbury, Aotearoa, New Zealand.

出版信息

R Soc Open Sci. 2022 Sep 7;9(9):220785. doi: 10.1098/rsos.220785. eCollection 2022 Sep.

DOI:10.1098/rsos.220785
PMID:36133151
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9449479/
Abstract

Women are under-represented in academic staff in universities worldwide. Our work builds on other studies of 'demographic inertia'. We find that time will not bridge the gender representation gap in academia, and echo others in saying bold actions are required to reach parity. Our work then uses New Zealand's unique system of scoring individual research performance to test empirically which levers universities should pull, and in which combinations. We combine individual research performance scores with 20 years of data from one university to parametrize a rank-structured mathematical model using Leslie matrices. Our model compares three key levers of change at universities' disposal-hiring, promotion and attrition. We apply the model to a bifurcated population of university staff-those with high research activity, and those who are moderately active-based on their national research quality score. We then test levers in various combinations that management could pull to improve gender representation. We find that the solutions are different for the high versus moderate research performers. For individuals with high research activity, universities should concentrate on equitable hiring practices. For those with more moderate research activity, more equitable promotion practices hold the key.

摘要

在全球范围内的大学学术人员中,女性所占比例较低。我们的研究建立在其他关于“人口惯性”的研究基础之上。我们发现时间并不能弥合学术界的性别代表性差距,并且与其他人的观点一致,即需要采取大胆行动才能实现平等。我们的研究随后利用新西兰独特的个人研究绩效评分系统,通过实证检验大学应该动用哪些杠杆以及以何种组合方式来实现这一目标。我们将个人研究绩效分数与一所大学20年的数据相结合,使用莱斯利矩阵来参数化一个等级结构的数学模型。我们的模型比较了大学可采用的三个关键变革杠杆——招聘、晋升和人员流动。我们将该模型应用于大学工作人员的两类人群——根据其国家研究质量得分,分为研究活动频繁的人员和研究活动中等的人员。然后,我们测试管理层为改善性别代表性而可能采用的各种杠杆组合。我们发现,对于研究表现高和中等的人员,解决方案是不同的。对于研究活动频繁的个人,大学应专注于公平的招聘做法。对于研究活动较为中等的人员,更公平的晋升做法是关键。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/cb931ed4bded/rsos220785f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/151d2e99a965/rsos220785f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/276c2de62d3c/rsos220785f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/cb931ed4bded/rsos220785f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/151d2e99a965/rsos220785f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/276c2de62d3c/rsos220785f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d35e/9449479/cb931ed4bded/rsos220785f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Levers of change: using mathematical models to compare gender equity interventions in universities.变革杠杆:运用数学模型比较大学中的性别平等干预措施
R Soc Open Sci. 2022 Sep 7;9(9):220785. doi: 10.1098/rsos.220785. eCollection 2022 Sep.
2
Gender inequality in academia: Problems and solutions for women faculty in STEM.学术界的性别不平等:STEM 领域女性教职员工面临的问题与解决方案。
J Neurosci Res. 2021 Jan;99(1):13-23. doi: 10.1002/jnr.24631. Epub 2020 Oct 25.
3
Why so Few, Still? Challenges to Attracting, Advancing, and Keeping Women Faculty of Color in Academia.为何仍然如此之少?吸引、提升和留住学术界有色人种女性教员面临的挑战。
Front Sociol. 2022 Jan 18;6:792198. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2021.792198. eCollection 2021.
4
Stochastic modelling of intersectional pay gaps in universities.大学交叉薪酬差距的随机建模。
R Soc Open Sci. 2023 Oct 11;10(10):230615. doi: 10.1098/rsos.230615. eCollection 2023 Oct.
5
Tuberculosis结核病
6
Gender equity in emergency medicine: Five years on, where are we headed?急诊医学中的性别平等:五年过去了,我们走向何方?
Emerg Med Australas. 2022 Apr;34(2):288-290. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.13910. Epub 2021 Dec 6.
7
[Girls are more successful than boys at the university. Gender group differences in models integrating motivational and aggressive components correlated with Test-Anxiety].在大学里女生比男生更成功。整合动机和攻击性成分的模型中的性别群体差异与考试焦虑相关。
Encephale. 2004 Jan-Feb;30(1):1-15. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(04)95410-3.
8
Organizational climate with gender equity and burnout among university academics in Japan.日本大学学者中具有性别平等与职业倦怠的组织氛围。
Ind Health. 2016 Dec 7;54(6):480-487. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2016-0126. Epub 2016 Oct 1.
9
Using human factors and ergonomics methods to challenge the status quo: Designing for gender equitable research outcomes.运用人因工程学方法来挑战现状:为性别公平的研究成果进行设计。
Appl Ergon. 2022 Feb;99:103634. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103634. Epub 2021 Nov 6.
10
Perceptions of gender equity and markers of achievement in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a qualitative study.国家卫生研究院生物医学研究中心性别平等认知与成就指标:一项定性研究。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2022 Sep 24;20(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12961-022-00904-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Female-dominated disciplines have lower evaluated research quality and funding success rates, for men and women.女性主导的学科领域,无论对男性还是女性,其研究质量和资助成功率的评估都较低。
Elife. 2024 Sep 5;13:RP97613. doi: 10.7554/eLife.97613.
2
Gendered hiring and attrition on the path to parity for academic faculty.性别化的招聘和人员流失对学术教职员工实现均等化的影响。
Elife. 2024 Jul 10;13:RP93755. doi: 10.7554/eLife.93755.
3
Stochastic modelling of intersectional pay gaps in universities.大学交叉薪酬差距的随机建模。

本文引用的文献

1
Research performance and age explain less than half of the gender pay gap in New Zealand universities.在新西兰的大学中,研究绩效和年龄解释了不到性别薪酬差距的一半。
PLoS One. 2020 Jan 22;15(1):e0226392. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226392. eCollection 2020.
2
Gender and societies: a grassroots approach to women in science.性别与社会:一种针对科学界女性的基层方法。
R Soc Open Sci. 2019 Sep 4;6(9):190633. doi: 10.1098/rsos.190633. eCollection 2019 Sep.
3
Mathematical model of gender bias and homophily in professional hierarchies.职业层级中性别偏见与同质性的数学模型。
R Soc Open Sci. 2023 Oct 11;10(10):230615. doi: 10.1098/rsos.230615. eCollection 2023 Oct.
Chaos. 2019 Feb;29(2):023135. doi: 10.1063/1.5066450.
4
The gender gap in science: How long until women are equally represented?科学界的性别差距:女性何时才能平等代表?
PLoS Biol. 2018 Apr 19;16(4):e2004956. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2004956. eCollection 2018 Apr.
5
Gender in Science and Engineering Faculties: Demographic Inertia Revisited.理工科院校中的性别问题:重新审视人口结构惯性
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 21;10(10):e0139767. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139767. eCollection 2015.
6
Inequality quantified: Mind the gender gap.不平等量化:关注性别差距。
Nature. 2013 Mar 7;495(7439):22-4. doi: 10.1038/495022a.
7
Leaks in the pipeline: separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia.管道泄漏:从人口统计学惯性中分离出学术界持续存在的性别差异。
Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Sep 22;279(1743):3736-41. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0822. Epub 2012 Jun 20.
8
Why do faculty leave? Reasons for attrition of women and minority faculty from a medical school: four-year results.教师为何离职?医学院女性和少数族裔教师流失的原因:四年期结果。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008 Sep;17(7):1111-8. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2007.0582.
9
Invasive rodent eradication on islands.岛屿上入侵鼠类的根除
Conserv Biol. 2007 Oct;21(5):1258-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00755.x.