Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37091814›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2023

Mind the gender gap: The social neuroscience of belonging.

Gina Rippon

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gina RipponCollege of Health and Life Sciences, Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Aston University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gender gaps persist in the 21st century, in many aspects of society and in many types of organisation. There are earnings gaps in almost all domains, reports of glass ceilings and the "missing middle" in business, finance, law and politics, and dramatic under-representation of women in many branches of science, even in the most "gender equal" countries. This is despite decades of effort to address them, including targeted legislation and many Diversity and Inclusion initiatives. Early essentialist, competence-based explanations for the existence of gender gaps have been largely discredited at the research level, although their persistence in the public consciousness and at the level of education and training can still negatively bias both individual self-belief and organisational processes. Contemporary essentialist explanations are now emerging, with claims that such gaps are the manifestations of the presence or absence of endogenous, brain-based characteristics underpinning career progression or career preferences. The focus remains on the individual as the source of gender imbalances. Less attention has been paid to the contextual aspects of organisations where gender gaps are evident, to inclusion (or the lack of it), or the availability of unbiased reward and progression pathways. Advances in 21st century social cognitive neuroscience are revealing the importance of external organisational processes as powerful brain-changing forces, with their potentially negative impact on self-belief and a sense of belonging. Key research is demonstrating the cortical and behavioural consequences of negative social experiences, with the activation of core inhibitory pathways associated with low self-esteem, lack of engagement, and eventual withdrawal. This paper will argue that reference to such research will provide better explanations for the persistence of gender gaps, and offer evidence-based insights into addressing gender gap issues. Importantly, this is not a rejection of an endogenous, brain-based explanation for gender gaps but the elaboration of a better-informed 21st century model, flagging up the need to take factors such as cultural stereotyping and organisational bias into account in any drive toward true gender equity, or genuinely levelled playing fields.

Indexed as

belongingexpectancy-valuegender gapinclusionpredictive codingsocial brainsocial rejectionstereotypes

Identifiers

PMID37091814
PMCPMC10116861
OpenAlexW4362606313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.