ReviewAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2018
How Gender Stereotypes May Limit Female Faculty Advancement in Communication Sciences and Disorders.
Review in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends of female authorship in speech-language pathology publications over the last decade.BMJ open · 2025Article
- The impostor phenomenon among surgeons and surgeons in training: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Nursing faculty readiness to teach online: a survey of nursing educators from Saudi Arabia and the UK.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Gender gap-Gender-specific development in the field of obstetrics and gynecology in Germany in the last 20 years.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Inequity in Peer Review in Communication Sciences and Disorders.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022Article
- Preliminary Evaluation of Applicants to Master's Programs in Speech-Language Pathology Using Vignettes and Criteria From a Holistic Review Process.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2022Article
- State of the Practice of Team Science in Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021Article
- Developing, Implementing, and Learning from a Student-Led Initiative to Support Minority Students in Communication Sciences and Disorders.Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: The field of communication sciences and disorders (CSD) faces a critical shortage of the faculty essential to train the future workforce of speech-language pathologists and audiologists. Despite a predominance of women in the field, men receive doctoral degrees, tenure status, academic leadership positions, and American Speech-Language-Hearing Association awards at disproportionately higher rates than women. The purpose of this review is to explore how implicit gender bias may contribute to female faculty advancement, including current and projected faculty workforce shortages, and to propose tangible solutions. Method: The authors present proportions of men and women who receive doctoral degrees, advance to each faculty rank, receive tenure status, hold department chairs in CSD, and receive American Speech-Language-Hearing Association honors and awards. They review ways in which cultural stereotypes give rise to implicit gender bias and discuss myriad ways that implicit gender bias may influence the decisions of students considering an academic career in CSD and their career trajectories. Conclusions: Cultural stereotypes about men and women lead to implicit gender bias that may have real consequences for female faculty advancement in CSD. Such implicit bias can influence career selection and outcomes within the field in multiple ways. To ensure that CSD continues to attract top talent and maintain a robust pipeline of future faculty in doctoral training programs, the field must recognize the existence of implicit gender bias and implement evidence-based strategies to minimize its potentially damaging effects on the future of the profession.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.