ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Mapping social exclusion in STEM to men's implicit bias and women's career costs.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stereotype Threat at Work: A Meta-Analysis.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2026Pooled it
- Friendship networks predict girls' STEM fit and interest through subjective belonging.Group processes & intergroup relations : GPIR · 2026Article
- Role of organizational network analyses to advance workforce inclusion and belonging: a scoping literature review.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Mapping the patriarchy in conservation.npj biodiversity · 2024Review
- Reply to Loh: Exploratory mediational insights regarding the link between parents' perceptions of socioeconomic mobility and opportunity hoarding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Analysis of Food Extracts with Thin Layer Chromatography: A STEM Outreach Activity.Journal of chemical education · 2024Article
- Factors affecting women scientists' retention and progress in STEM fields in the UAE: A cross-sectional study.F1000Research · 2024Article
- A European perspective on structural barriers to women's career progression in neuroscience.Nature neuroscience · 2023Review
- The cost of social influence: Own-gender and gender-stereotype social learning biases in adolescents and adults.PloS one · 2023Article
- Not yet defect-free: the current landscape for women in computational materials research.npj computational materials · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Why are women socially excluded in fields dominated by men? Beyond the barriers associated with any minority group's mere numerical underrepresentation, we theorized that gender stereotypes exacerbate the social exclusion of women in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) workplaces, with career consequences. Although widely discussed, clear evidence of these relationships remains elusive. In a sample of 1,247 STEM professionals who work in teams, we tested preregistered hypotheses that acts of gendered social exclusion are systematically associated with both men's gender stereotypes (Part 1) and negative workplace outcomes for women (Part 2). Combining social network metrics of inclusion and reaction time measures of implicit stereotypes (the tendency to "think STEM, think men"), this study provides unique empirical evidence of the chilly climate women often report experiencing in STEM. Men with stronger implicit gender stereotypes had fewer social ties to female teammates. In turn, women (but not men) with fewer incoming cross-gender social ties reported worse career fit and engagement. Moderated mediation revealed that for women (but not men), cross-gender social exclusion was linked to more negative workplace outcomes via lower social fit. Effects of social exclusion were distinct from respect. We discuss the possible benefits of fostering positive cross-gender social relationships to promote women's professional success in STEM.
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.