Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42647530›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Gender representation begets gender representation.

Stella F Lourenco, Kylee Novick, Ryno Kruger, Arber Tasimi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Stella F LourencoDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3070-7122
Kylee NovickDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Ryno KrugerDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1002-2230
Arber TasimiDepartment of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on the underrepresentation of women in academia and other professions indicates that women may be underrepresented in fields associated with intrinsic aptitude-or "brilliance"-because women are stereotyped as not possessing brilliance. At the same time, women may be less likely to pursue careers in such fields because few women are in them, which highlights the importance of understanding the role of gender representation in guiding professional interests. Across four studies (N  = 1,680), we found that people have knowledge of the male-female breakdown of employees for a broad range of occupations (Study 1) and that current gender demographics predicts interest and belonging in hypothetical advertised employment (Studies 2-4). The effect of gender demographics was robust, even prioritized over messaging about ability, particularly among women (Study 3), and scaling parametrically according to the ratio of male and female employees (Study 4). Especially among women, professions with more females elicited greater interest and feelings of belonging than those with more males, even when those professions were associated with brilliance. These findings suggest that altering beliefs about brilliance for success in specific professions, though important, may be insufficient for increasing female representation in fields where women are underrepresented. Instead, increasing future female representation may benefit from increasing the presence of more women now.

Indexed as

SexismEmploymentFemaleHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID42647530
PMCPMC13514026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.