The Queen Bee phenomenon in Academia 15 years after: Does it still exist, and if so, why?

The queen bee phenomenon in Canadian surgical subspecialties: An evaluation of gender biases in the resident training environment

BACKGROUND

The queen bee phenomenon (QBP) describes the behavioural response that occurs when women achieve success in a male-dominated environment, and in this position of authority, treat their female subordinates more critically. It has been demonstrated in business, academia, the military, and police force. The goal of this study was to determine whether the QBP occurs in surgical specialties. We hypothesized that female surgeons, fellows, and senior surgical residents would be more critical in their assessment of junior female residents than their male counterparts.

METHODS

A scenario-based survey was distributed via email to all Canadian surgical programs between February and March 2021. Scenarios were designed to assess either female or male learners. Centers distributed surveys to attending surgeons, surgical fellows, resident physicians, and affiliate surgeons. Respondents average Likert score for female-based and male-based questions were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed based on gender, age, seniority, and surgical specialty.

RESULTS

716 survey responses were collected, with 387 respondents identifying as male (54%) and 321 identifying as female (45%). 385 attending surgeons (54%), 66 fellows (9%), and 263 residents (37%) responded. The mean Likert scores for female respondents assessing female learners was significantly lower than male learners (p = 0·008, CI = 95%). During subgroup analysis, some specialties demonstrated significant scoring differences.

DISCUSSION

The QBP was shown to be present among surgical specialties. Female respondents assessed female learners more critically than their male counterparts.

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight the importance of tackling organizational biases to create more equitable educational and work environment in surgery.

The triggers and consequences of the Queen Bee phenomenon: A systematic literature review and integrative framework

Staines, Tavris and Jayaratne (1974) first introduced the Queen Bee Phenomenon (QBP). The term has been extensively employed to explain specific behaviors driven by organizational inequalities where women engaged in leadership positions actively restrain the opportunities of upper mobility for junior women. While the literature constantly addresses the causes and behaviors of this phenomenon, the current scholarship still lacks an integrated view of the QBP literature and a concise integrative framework that explores its triggers and consequences to advance research and provide evidence-based results to guide policy and managerial decisions. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to identify, analyze and synthesize the literature on the QBP. We conducted a systematic literature review engaging bibliometrics and content analysis. Our results highlight the current state of the art of the QBP literature and introduce a new integrative framework that shows the interplay between the triggers, traits and consequences of the QBP. We contribute to the field by integrating previous research in the field into a framework that synthesizes and connects the scattered literature. Our results are helpful for designing new organizational policies that reduce the impacts of the QBP in the workplace. The research agenda propose avenues for advancing our understanding of the phenomenon.

Gender differences in animal cognition science

Women's representation in science is increasing steadily, with some fields closing gender parity in terms of participation and scientific output. Animal cognition appears to fall into that category. Our current analysis of gender author balance (women versus men) in 600 animal cognition papers supported parity in many aspects, but also revealed some remaining disparities. Women animal cognition scientists often held first authorship positions (58% of the studies), received similar numbers of citations, and published in equally high impact factor journals as men. Women were still under represented in last-author position, which often reflects seniority status (37% of last authors were women). There were interesting results when we considered the gender of teams (of two or more authors): all-women author teams were the minority in our dataset and received on average fewer citations than all men or mixed author teams, regardless of the quality of the journal (as measured by the journal's impact factor). Women more often focussed on mammals, whereas men more often focussed on fish, both as first authors and as same-gender teams. Men, as first author or in men-only teams, restricted their research more often to organisms of a single sex, compared to women, as first author and as members of a team. Our study suggests that there are many indices of the significant contribution of both women and men scientists in animal cognition, although some gender biases may remain.

Gender bias in special issues: evidence from a bibliometric analysis

Even though the majority of psychologists are women, they are outnumbered by men in senior academic ranks. One reason for this representation bias in academia is that men favor other men in decision-making, especially when the stakes are high. We tested the possibility of such bias in a bibliometric analysis, in which we coded editors' and authors' gender in regular and special issues, the latter considered of higher scientific prominence. We examined all special issues from five prominent scientific outlets in the fields of personality and social psychology published in the twenty-first century. Altogether, we analyzed 1911 articles nested in 93 sets comprising a special issue and a neighboring regular issue treated as a control condition. For articles published in special (but not regular) issues, when there were more men editors, more men first-authored and co-authored the work. This pattern suggests how gender bias can be perpetuated within academia and calls for revising the editorial policies of leading psychology journals.

Our Grandmothers' Legacy: Challenges Faced by Female Ancestors Leave Traces in Modern Women's Same-Sex Relationships

Investigations of women's same-sex relationships present a paradoxical pattern, with women generally disliking competition, yet also exhibiting signs of intrasexual rivalry. The current article leverages the historical challenges faced by female ancestors to understand modern women's same-sex relationships. Across history, women were largely denied independent access to resources, often depending on male partners' provisioning to support themselves and their children. Same-sex peers thus became women's primary romantic rivals in competing to attract and retain relationships with the limited partners able and willing to invest. Modern women show signs of this competition, disliking and aggressing against those who threaten their romantic prospects, targeting especially physically attractive and sexually uninhibited peers. However, women also rely on one another for aid, information, and support. As most social groups were patrilocal across history, upon marriage, women left their families to reside with their husbands. Female ancestors likely used reciprocal altruism or mutualism to facilitate cooperative relationships with nearby unrelated women. To sustain these mutually beneficial cooperative exchange relationships, women may avoid competitive and status-striving peers, instead preferring kind, humble, and loyal allies. Ancestral women who managed to simultaneously compete for romantic partners while forming cooperative female friendships would have been especially successful. Women may therefore have developed strategies to achieve both competitive and cooperative goals, such as guising their intrasexual competition as prosociality or vulnerability. These historical challenges make sense of the seemingly paradoxical pattern of female aversion to competition, relational aggression, and valuation of loyal friends, offering insight into possible opportunities for intervention.

Women in leadership positions in universities: are they really queen bees?

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to assess the adherence to the traits of the queen bee phenomenon (QBP) for women who hold leadership positions in Brazilian higher education institutions (HEIs) and to compare their responses with those of women without leadership positions and of men on the same dimensions.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 703 academics from 88 HEIs participated in this study. The data were analyzed using a statistical package to calculate descriptive and inferential statistics. For these, 2 × 2 analysis of variance tests were performed to compare leader women vs nonleader women and leader women vs leader men.

Findings

The results indicate that leader women do not fit to all dimensions of the QBP. They report high averages to commitment, agency traits and personal sacrifices to career (Male self-description) and to meritocratic discourse. However, leader women assess their junior counterparts with higher averages to commitment and agency traits than women without leadership positions and leader men assess their junior counterparts. Women in leadership positions report superior identification with same gender colleagues and declare to be more supportive with affirmative policies for women's professional development than nonleader women and leader men.

Practical implications

This study reinforces that same gender conflict in the work environment is not a female characteristic and also promotes reflections on the influence of organizational culture, men hostility toward quotas and gender stereotypes for female progression in the academic context.

Originality/value

This study provides an empirical analysis of the QBP to academic women in Brazilian HEIs and compares its dimensions to nonleader women and leader men. The analysis of a sexist culture enabled original results, as nondistancing of the self-group, even if leader women presented some QB traits.

Gender and professionalism: Still a black box a call for research, debate and action. Suggestions from and beyond the pandemic crisis

The gender-professionalism nexus is the source of persistent inequalities in our society. Its continuing relevance emerges even more in the pandemic crisis as a revealing context of social dynamics, showing a “differential in visibility” among welfare professionals, associated with gender, status and power. The attribution of “masculine” and “feminine” connotations (re)produces structures of inequality: there are male/dominant and female/subordinate professions. The exploration of this nexus reveals the existence of two polar meanings of care and body work, as well as two conceptions of professionalism and citizenship. Caring as “therapy” is related to “work on the body” and reflects a classical conception of professionalism aimed at client-citizens; whereas caring as “to care for” is related to “work with and between bodies” and meets better new professionalism aimed at active citizens. Considering gender as professional practice ideology highlights how “gender commonality” is not a solution to inequalities. Furthermore, it can contribute to the deconstruction of the dominance structures. In a such research agenda, narratives of professionals are the key to open the black box. Taking up the challenge to open the gender-professionalism black box is not just a matter of research, but of political action, starting from academia itself.

Changing the Academic Gender Narrative through Open Access

In this article, we ask whether dominant narratives of gender and performance within academic institutions are masking stories that may be both more complex and potentially more hopeful than those which are often told using publication-related data. Influenced by world university rankings, institutions emphasise so-called ‘excellent’ research practices: publish in ‘high impact’, elite subscription journals indexed by the commercial bibliographic databases that inform the various ranking systems. In particular, we ask whether data relating to institutional demographics and open access publications could support a different story about the roles that women are playing as pioneers and practitioners of open scholarship. We review gender bias in scholarly publications and discuss examples of open access research publications that highlight a positive advantage for women. Using analysis of workforce demographics and open research data from our Open Knowledge Initiative project, we explore relationships and correlations between academic gender and open access research output from universities in Australia and the United Kingdom. This opens a conversation about different possibilities and models for exploring research output by gender and changing the dominant narrative of deficit in academic publishing.

It’s a man’s world; right? How women’s opinions about gender inequality affect physiological responses in men

In two experiments, we examined how men respond to women who either challenge or legitimize societal gender inequality, and how gender identification moderates these responses. We hypothesized that men feel less threatened by women who legitimize (vs. challenge) the gender hierarchy, and evaluate these women more positively. To investigate these expectations, we assessed self-reports (Studies 1 and 2) and cardiovascular threat/challenge responses (Study 2). Both studies showed that men experience less negative emotions when presented with a woman who legitimized (vs. challenged) the gender hierarchy. Moreover, among men with a relatively high gender identification, a woman who challenged the gender hierarchy elicited a physiological response pattern indicative of threat, whereas a woman who legitimized the gender hierarchy elicited a pattern indicative of challenge. Results are discussed in terms of social identity theory, status threat, and self-distancing behavior.

Equal Representation Does Not Mean Equal Opportunity: Women Academics Perceive a Thicker Glass Ceiling in Social and Behavioral Fields Than in the Natural Sciences and Economics

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.

Queen Bees: How Is Female Managers' Happiness Determined?

This paper aims to study the determinants of subjective happiness among working females with a focus on female managers. Drawn on a large social survey data set (N = 10470) in China, this paper constructs gender development index at sub-national levels to study how institutional settings are related to female managers' happiness. We find that female managers report higher levels of happiness than non-managerial employees. However, the promoting effect is contingent on individual characteristics and social-economic settings. The full sample regression suggests that female managers behaving in a masculine way generally report a high level of happiness. Meanwhile, female managers who refuse to support gender equality report low happiness levels. Sub-sample analysis reveals that these causalities are conditioned on regional culture. Masculine behavior and gender role orientation significantly predict subjective happiness only in gender-egalitarian regions. This study is one of the first to consider both internal (individual traits) and external (social-economic environment) factors when investigating how female managers' happiness is impacted. Also, this study challenges the traditional wisdom on the relationship between female managers' job satisfaction and work-home conflict. This study extends the literature by investigating the impacts of female managers' masculine behavior on their happiness. This study is useful for promoting female managers' leadership effectiveness and happiness.

Academics as Agentic Superheroes: Female academics' lack of fit with the agentic stereotype of success limits their career advancement

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.

Women in Surgery Italia: National Survey Assessing Gender-Related Challenges

BACKGROUND

In 2019, women accounted for 46% of surgical residents. Despite the international debate on gender disparities, no literature regarding the experience in Italy is available. The aim of this survey study was to assess satisfaction among female surgeons in Italy, and determine whether they encounter gender-based discrimination.

STUDY DESIGN

An anonymous, 83-item web-based survey was distributed among female surgeons working in Italy, from November 18 to December 31, 2020. Gender equity, satisfaction, and factors associated with higher satisfaction and work-life balance were explored.

RESULTS

There were 3,242 volunteer respondents, 1,833 of whom completed at least 50% of the specific questions and were included in the study. Approximately 54% of female Italian surgeons reported being satisfied with their job, but only 34% with their work-life balance. Among residents, 67% thought they were not adequately trained. The majority of respondents were responsible for most of the housekeeping (60%) and childcare duties (53%), regardless of their partner's workload, and 62% reported that gender affects the way they are treated at work, with most of them experiencing microaggressions. Sexual harassment was common (59%), but only 10% of women reported it.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Italian female surgeons are satisfied with their professional choice. However, they face gender discrimination, including incidents of sexual harassment and microaggression. Due to the fact that half of surgeons working in Italian hospitals will be females in the next few years, actions are urgently required to build a culture that supports a gender-neutral environment.

Understanding and finding opportunities for inclusive mentorship and sponsorships in vascular surgery

Deliberate efforts are needed to address the lack of diversity in the vascular surgery workforce and to correct the current scarcity of diversity in vascular surgery leadership. Effective mentorship and sponsorship are crucial for success in academic surgery. In the present report, we have explained the importance of mentorship and sponsorship relationships for surgeons historically underrepresented in medicine, discussed the unique challenges faced by them in academic surgery, and provided a practical framework for fostering intentional and thoughtful mentor and sponsor relationships to nurture their careers.

Implicit gender-career bias in postgraduate medical training still exists, mainly in residents and in females

BACKGROUND

More and more female residents enter postgraduate medical training (PGMT). Meanwhile, women are still underrepresented in academic medicine, in leadership positions and in most surgical specialties. This suggests that female residents' career development may still be negatively impacted by subtle, often unconscious stereotype associations regarding gender and career-ambition, called implicit gender-career bias. This study explored the existence and strength of implicit gender-career bias in doctors who currently work in PGMT, i.e. in attending physicians who act as clinical trainers and in their residents.

METHODS

We tested implicit gender-career bias in doctors working in PGMT by means of an online questionnaire and an online Implicit Association Test (IAT). We used standard IAT analysis to calculate participants' IAT D scores, which indicate the direction and strength of bias. Linear regression analyses were used to test whether the strength of bias was related to gender, position (resident or clinical trainer) or specialty (non-surgical or surgical specialty).

RESULTS

The mean IAT D score among 403 participants significantly differed from zero (D-score = 0.36 (SD = 0.39), indicating bias associating male with career and female with family. Stronger gender-career bias was found in women (β_female =0 .11; CI 0.02; 0.19; p = 0.01) and in residents (β_resident 0.12; CI 0.01; 0.23; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

This study may provide a solid basis for explicitly addressing implicit gender-career bias in PGMT. The general understanding in the medical field is that gender bias is strongest among male doctors' in male-dominated surgical specialties. Contrary to this view, this study demonstrated that the strongest bias is held by females themselves and by residents, independently of their specialty. Apparently, the influx of female doctors in the medical field has not yet reduced implicit gender-career bias in the next generation of doctors, i.e. in today's residents, and in females.