Dancers in the Dark: Scientific Careers According to a Gender-Blind Model of Promotion

References

• Ackers, Louise. 2004. Managing work and family life in peripatetic careers: the experiences of mobile women scientists in the European Union. Women’s Studies International Forum 27: 189–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, Daun R. 2005. The importance of mentoring programs to women’s career advancement in biotechnology. Journal of Career Development 32: 60–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagilhole, Barbara, and Jane Goode. 2001. The contradiction of the myth of individual merit, and the reality of a patriarchal support system in academic careers: A feminist investigation. European Journal of Women’s Studies 8: 161–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benschop, Yvonne, and Margo Broun. 2003. Crumbling ivory towers: academic organizing and its gender effects. Gender, Work and Organization 10(2): 194–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berryman, Su E. 1983. Who will do science? Trends, and their Causes in Minority and Female Representation among Holders of Advanced Degrees in Science and Mathematics. New York: Rockefeller Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Borrego, Ángel, Maite Barrios, Anna Villarroya, and Candela Ollé. 2010. Scientific output and impact of postdoctoral scientists: a gender perspective. Scientometrics 83: 93–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman, Barry, James S. Dietz, and Monica Gaughan. 2001. Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management 22: 716–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman, Barry, and Monica Gaughan. 2011. How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers. Research Policy 40: 1393–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buzzanell, Patrice M., and Steven R. Goldzwig. 1991. Linear and nonlinear career models: metaphors, paradigms, and ideologies. Management Communication Quarterly 4: 466–505.
   Google Scholar
• Ceci, Stephen J., Donna K. Ginther, Shulamit Kahn, and Wendy W. Williams. 2014. Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 15: 75–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De la Rica, Susana, and Amaia Iza. 2005. Career planning in Spain: do fixed-term contracts delay marriage and parenthood? Review of Economics of the Household 3: 49–73.
   Google Scholar
• Dietz, James S., Ivan Chompalov, Barry Bozeman, Eliesh L. O’Neil, and Jongwon Park. 2000. Using the curriculum vita to study the career paths of scientists and engineers: an exploratory assessment. Scientometrics 49: 419–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EC [European Commission]. 2012. Enhancing excellence, gender equality and efficiency in research and innovation. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC [European Commission]. 2013. She figures. gender in research and innovation. statistcs on indicators. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Elder, Glen H. 1994. Time, human agency, and social change: perspective on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly 57: 4–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, Gosta, coord. 2013. El déficit de la natalidad en Europa. La singularidad del caso español. Colección Estudios Sociales n. 36. Barcelona: Obra Social La Caixa.
   Google Scholar
• Evetts, Julia. 2000. Analysing change in women’s careers: culture, structure and action dimensions. Gender, Work and Organisations 7: 57–67.
   Google Scholar
• Fels, Anna. 2004. Do women lack ambition? Harvard Business Review April: 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, Mary F. 2005. Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science 35: 131–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González, Ana M. and Núria Vergés. 2013. International mobility of women in science and technology careers: shaping plans for personal and professional purposes. Gender, Place and Culture 20: 613–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González, Ana M. 2014a. ¿Camuflaje o transformación? Estrategia profesional de las mujeres en carreras tecnológicas altamente masculinizadas. Educar 50: 187–205.
   Google Scholar
• González, Ana M. 2014b. Inclusion of women in science. long-term strategies for alone or with partners’ women. Géneros. Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies 3: 459–82.
   Google Scholar
• Heilman, Madeline E., and Julie J. Chen. 2005. Same behavior, different consequences: reactions to men’s and women’s altruistic citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 90: 431–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochschild, Arlie, and Anne Machung. 1990. The second shift. New York: Avon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kemelgor, Carol, and Henry Etzkowitz. 2001. Overcoming isolation: women’s dilemmas in american academic science. Minerva 39: 153–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krefting, Linda A. 2003. Intertwined discourses of merit and gender: evidence from academic employment in the USA. Gender, Work and Organization 10: 260–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langberg, Kamma. 2006. The gender gap in the public research sector. The case of Denmark. In Women in Scientific Careers. Unleashing the Potential, ed. OCDE, 61–76. Paris: OCDE.
   Google Scholar
• Lyon, Dawn, and Alison E. Woodward. 2004. Gender and time at the top: cultural construction of time in high-level careers and homes. European Journal of Women’s Studies 11: 205–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, J. Scott, and Mary F. Fox. 1995. Scientific careers: universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology 21: 45–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorenz-Meyer, Dagmar. 2014. Reassembling gender: on the immanent politics of gendering apparatuses of bodily production in science. Women: a cultural review 25: 78–98.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, Herbert W., Upali W. Jayasinghe, Nigel W. Bond. 2008. Improving the peer-review process for grant applications. reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. American Psychologist 63: 160–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauleón, Elba, and Maria Bordons. 2009. Male and female involvement in patenting activity in Spain. Scientometrics 83: 605–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauleón, Elba, Cinzia Daraio, and Maria Bordons. 2014. Exploring gender differences in patenting in Spain. Research Evaluation 23: 62–78. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvt030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., John F. Dovidio, Victoria L. Brescoll, Mark J. Graham, and Jo Handelsman. 2012. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109: 16474–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rees, Teresa. 2011. The gendered construction of scientific excellence. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 36: 133–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rier, David A. 2003. Gender, lifecourse and publication decisions in toxic-exposute epidemiology: ‘now!’ versus ‘wait a minute!’. Social Studies of Science 33: 269–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiebinger, Londa. 1999. Has feminism changed science? Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sealy, Ruth. 2010. Changing perceptions of meritocraty in senior women’s careers. Gender in Management: An International Journal 25: 184–97.
   Google Scholar
• Shauman, Kimberlee A. 1998. Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review 63: 847–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siskind, Theresa, and Sharon Kearns. 1997. Gender bias in the evaluation of female faculty at the citadel: a qualitative analysis. Sex Roles 37: 495–525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Son Hing, Leanne S., Bobocel D. Ramona, and Mark P. Zanna. 2002. Meritocracy and opposition to affirmative action: making concession in the face of discrimination. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 83: 493–509.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svinth, Lisa. 2006. ‘Leaky pipeline’- to be or not to be a useful metaphor in understanding why women to a disproportional degree exit from scientific careers. 6th European Gender Research Conference, 31st August – 3rd September, in Lodz, Poland.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Brink, Marieke, and Yvonne Benschop. 2011. Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: sheep with five legs. Organization 19: 507–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, Yu, and Kimberlee A. Shauman. 1998. Sex differences in research productivity: new evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review 63: 847–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xie, Yu, and Kimberlee A. Shauman. 2003. Women in science: career processes and outcomes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zynovyeva, Natalia, and Manuel Bagues. 2011. Does gender matter for academic promotion? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment. IZA Discussion Paper No. 5537.
   Google Scholar
• Zynovyeva, Natalia, and Manuel Bagues. 2014. The role of connections in academic promotions http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2136888. (12/1/15).
   Google Scholar