Cultural Barriers to Women's Progression in Academic Careers: A France-Brazil Comparison Through the Lens of the Queen Bee Phenomena.

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-10-20 DOI:10.1111/sjop.13078
Catherine Esnard, Rebeca da Rocha Grangeiro
{"title":"Cultural Barriers to Women's Progression in Academic Careers: A France-Brazil Comparison Through the Lens of the Queen Bee Phenomena.","authors":"Catherine Esnard, Rebeca da Rocha Grangeiro","doi":"10.1111/sjop.13078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite significant improvements, women are still underrepresented at high levels in academia. Most research on these inequalities is conducted within a specific national academic system, without taking into account its cultural roots. The aim of the present study was to analyze the extent to which the cultural context acts as a barrier on women's career progression. Specifically, we focused on psychological processes described under the metaphor of Queen Bee Phenomenon that may reflect the ways in which female academics conform to male-gender roles encoded in androcentric social and academic culture. Two samples of women academic, one French (N = 73), the other Brazilian (N = 88), were compared through the lens of two dimension of the Queen Bee Phenomena: self-group distancing and gender hierarchy legitimation. Brazilian women identify more with their female peer group than their French counterparts. French women are more hostile to quotas and more inclined to adhere to meritocratic discourses than their Brazilian counterparts. Both academic contexts tend to perpetuate gender inequalities, but in different ways: by maintaining gender-stereotypical expectations in Brazil and meritocratic ideology in France. The implications for policies to promote a more egalitarian university context are discussed herein.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13078","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite significant improvements, women are still underrepresented at high levels in academia. Most research on these inequalities is conducted within a specific national academic system, without taking into account its cultural roots. The aim of the present study was to analyze the extent to which the cultural context acts as a barrier on women's career progression. Specifically, we focused on psychological processes described under the metaphor of Queen Bee Phenomenon that may reflect the ways in which female academics conform to male-gender roles encoded in androcentric social and academic culture. Two samples of women academic, one French (N = 73), the other Brazilian (N = 88), were compared through the lens of two dimension of the Queen Bee Phenomena: self-group distancing and gender hierarchy legitimation. Brazilian women identify more with their female peer group than their French counterparts. French women are more hostile to quotas and more inclined to adhere to meritocratic discourses than their Brazilian counterparts. Both academic contexts tend to perpetuate gender inequalities, but in different ways: by maintaining gender-stereotypical expectations in Brazil and meritocratic ideology in France. The implications for policies to promote a more egalitarian university context are discussed herein.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
女性学术职业发展的文化障碍:从 "女王蜂现象 "看法国与巴西的比较。
尽管取得了重大进展,但妇女在学术界高层的代表性仍然不足。有关这些不平等现象的大多数研究都是在特定国家的学术体系内进行的,没有考虑到其文化根源。本研究旨在分析文化背景在多大程度上阻碍了女性的职业发展。具体而言,我们重点研究了 "蜂王现象 "这一隐喻下的心理过程,这些过程可能反映了女学者在以男性为中心的社会和学术文化中如何遵从男性的性别角色。我们通过 "蜂后现象 "的两个维度:自我群体疏远和性别等级合法化,对两个女学者样本进行了比较,一个是法国样本(73 人),另一个是巴西样本(88 人)。巴西妇女比法国妇女更认同她们的女性同伴群体。与巴西女性相比,法国女性更反对配额制,更倾向于坚持任人唯贤的论调。两种学术环境都倾向于延续性别不平等,但方式不同:巴西维持性别陈规定型的期望,而法国则坚持任人唯贤的意识形态。本文讨论了促进大学环境更加平等的政策的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families. Does Resilience Mediate the Relationship Between Negative Self-Image and Psychological Distress in Middle-Aged and Older Gay and Bisexual Men? Intergenerational Relations and Well-being Among Older Middle Eastern/Arab American Immigrants During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Caregiving Appraisals and Emotional Valence: Moderating Effects of Activity Participation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1