Search

Although women's labour force participation has increased, women still lag behind in financial independence and men in spending time on parenting. Insight in individuals' explicit conversations with their partner about how to coordinate daily household, childcare and paid work may help to overcome these persistent inequalities. Using a daily diary design, the present study examined to what extent daily conversations with the partner about household, childcare and paid work can boost a more equal, fair task division and relationship quality among Dutch mothers and fathers in a heterosexual relationship (N = 1235 daily reported conversations nested in 157 participants; 66.2% female). Mixed model results showed that (1) on days when participants conversed more with their partner about household tasks, they reported a more egalitarian task division and higher satisfaction with and fairness of the task division, and higher relationship quality (2) this higher daily satisfaction with and perceived fairness of the task division (but not egalitarianism) were, in turn, associated with higher relationship quality and (3) conversations had limited spill-over effects to the next day, stressing the importance of daily coordination. Together, these findings imply that daily household coordination helps parents to overcome traditional gender roles and align with their desired work/family division., (© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.)

Gender gaps in academia persist with women being less likely to attain leadership, earning lower salaries, and receiving less research funding and resources compared to their male peers. The current research demonstrates yet another, more intangible gender gap in academia called lack of fit, whereby compared to male academics, female academics perceive higher misfit between their professional self-concept and the agentic 'superhero' stereotype of the successful academic. The entire population of Dutch academics (i.e., assistant, associate, and full professors from 14 universities) was approached to participate in a nationwide survey. Results from this unique dataset (N = 3978) demonstrate that academics perceive agency (e.g., self-confident, self-focused, competitive) as more descriptive of the stereotypical successful academic than communality (e.g., team-oriented, good teacher, collegial). Importantly, early career female academics perceived highest lack of fit with this narrowly-defined agentic occupational stereotype, which was correlated with lower work engagement, professional identification and career efficacy, and higher work exhaustion and exit intentions. Thus, lack of fit seems yet another barrier contributing to pervasive gender gaps in academia. Implications for building more inclusive academic cultures, where not only agentic but also communal academic practice is recognized and rewarded are discussed., (© 2021 The Authors. British Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.)

In the study of women in academia, the focus is often particularly on women's stark underrepresentation in the math-intensive fields of natural sciences, technology, and economics (NTE). In the non-math-intensive of fields life, social and behavioral (LSB) sciences, gender issues are seemingly less at stake because, on average, women are well-represented. However, in the current study, we demonstrate that equal gender representation in LSB disciplines does not guarantee women's equal opportunity to advance to full professorship-to the contrary. With a cross-sectional survey among N  = 2,109 academics at mid-level careers (i.e., assistant and associate professors) in the Netherlands, we test the hypothesis that in LSB (more than NTE), female academics perceive to hit a "thicker" glass ceiling-that is, they see a sharper contrast between the high representation of women at the lower compared to the top levels. We test whether this predicts female academics' lower estimated chances to reach full professorship relative to men in LSB (but not NTE). We introduce a novel perceived glass ceiling index (GCI), calculated based on academics' perceptions of the share of women and men in their direct work environment minus their perceptions of gender ratio among full professors in their field. Results confirm that the perceived glass ceiling is thicker in the non-math-intensive LSB compared to math-intensive NTE fields. Furthermore, only in LSB (but not NTE), women perceived a thicker glass ceiling than men. Moreover, only among female academics, the thicker the perceived glass ceiling, the lower their estimated chances to become full professor 1 day. Combined, a moderated mediation showed that for women only, a thicker perceived glass ceiling in LSB compared to NTE disciplines predicted their lower estimated chances to advance to full professor level. No such mediation occurred for men. We conclude that women's higher numerical representation in LSB disciplines does not negate a male-dominant normative standard about academic leadership and success. Paradoxically, the perceived odds for female academics to reach the top of their field are lower in fields where they are relatively highly represented, and this may pose unique barriers to women's perceived opportunities for career success., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 van Veelen and Derks.)