literature review on gender discrimination in education

EDITORIAL article

Editorial: gender equality and women’s empowerment in education.

• 1 Department of Specific Didactics, Faculty of Education, University of Burgos, Burgos, Spain
• 2 Department of Educational Sciences, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Editorial on the Research Topic Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Education

Current scholarly literature shows that gender inequalities are still present in the process of curricular decision making and teacher practices. These inequalities are expressed through the selection of educational content, the application of methodological strategies, the selection of teaching resources, interpersonal relationships, specific task assignments, or even seating choices within the classroom. These ongoing gender-related issues drive the need for teachers to receive specific and transversal training in this area. Such trainings should be aimed at revealing gender relations as a type of power relationship for the promotion of social change.

The literature in the field of teacher training indicates that the maintenance of gender stereotypes and biases in teacher discourses and practices reinforces the sex-gender system and, consequently, inequalities. Further research is therefore still needed to study the discourses that emerged from the teaching practices around gender. Moreover, research in this field should encourage critical reflection on teacher training plans and the teaching curriculum itself.

The adoption of coeducational approaches and the promotion of education in and for gender equality entails transforming the traditional teaching curriculum to overcome the androcentric constructive bases of historical, social, and literary knowledge. Such transformation would also motivate the incorporation of “polysemic views” in the understanding and interpretation of social reality. Even today, it is common to recognize in mainstream social communication discourses, such as advertising or audio-visual artistic expressions, clear imagery of unquestionable, allegedly identarian gender cultural patterns. The overcoming or relativization of these patterns should necessarily go through the reexamination of curricular content.

The eradication of gender inequalities requires not only the integration of all the voices that have built social knowledge but also the overcoming of gender stereotypes within the education system. It is thus essential to identify the shortcomings of teachers’ training and encourage gender studies as a requisite for their curricula in order to achieve inclusive, plural, and diverse models for teaching practices.

This Research Topic includes 15 manuscripts, from nine prestigious international academic institutions (Austria, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Finland, Germany, Spain, and Sweden) on important topics related to the inclusion of gender inequalities in teacher training, and the analysis of this concept in the official school curriculum, materials, and teacher practices.

The experiences and socio-cultural constructions of the concept of gender constitute the explanatory core of the research problem addressed in “ The Challenge of Women’s Inclusion for Novel Teachers. Case Study in a Teacher Educator Public University ”. This research analyzes the representations of novice teachers of History and Social Sciences on the presence and absence of women’s historical experience in their teaching practices. The research demonstrates the permanence of positivist and androcentric epistemological approaches in the teaching of History, and highlights the urgency of addressing gender inequalities as one of the most pressing social problems of our contemporaneity. In this vein, “ Classical Sociology Through the Lens of Gendered Experiences ” seeks to promote discussion on the mediating role of gendered experiences in classical sociology’s theories of the move towards modern society. This study evidences the constructive relativity of social knowledge and its consequences for sociological teaching and learning.

From the conception of a socio-constructive nature of sexism, the research “ Intersections Around Ambivalent Sexism: Internalized Homonegativity, Resistance to Heteronormativity and Other Correlates ” explores the levels of internalized sexism and homonegativity, and the resistance to heteronormativity of Spanish psychology students. Its results are consistent with those obtained in the study “ Evaluation of Sexist and Prejudiced Attitudes Toward Homosexuality in Spanish Future Teachers: Analysis of Related Variables ”, focused on the analysis of sexist and prejudiced attitudes toward homosexuality of future Spanish teachers. Both studies show the influence of factors such as political ideology, gender identity and sexual orientation on students’ beliefs and perceptions. They also point out the need to advance in the eradication of discrimination based on sex and sexual diversity in the training of future professionals, and the implementation of intersectional approaches to understand the sexist construct.

The consequences of the invisibility of female referents in education and, therefore, of models on which to build plural and empowered identities, derives from the limitations inherent in traditional gender expectations and attributions. The educational hegemony of these attributions, the basis of the study “ Nine Contradictory Observations About Girls’ and Boys’ Upbringing and Education—The Strength-Based Approach as the Way to Eliminate the Gender Gap ”, continue to limit the potential expectations and talents of girls. Through “nine contradictory observations”, this article directs its proposal towards a “strength-based approach” as a way to eradicate the gender gap. Along these lines, “ Mindfulness and Empathy: Mediating Factors and Gender Differences in a Spanish Sample ” highlights the lack of studies aimed at analyzing the potential moderating role of gender in the development of empathic skills.

The research production around the gender gap and gender-segregated differentiation seems not to have received the desired impact in educational social spaces. From this perspective, on the one hand, the article “ Differentiations in Visibility-Male Advantages and Female Disadvantages in Gender-Segregated Programmes ” starts from the differential articulation of inter- and intra-group visibility, by gender, in students, underrepresented in their programmes. On the other hand, the works “ Distributing Feedback Wisely to Empower Girls in STEM ” and “ Girls in STEM: Is It a Female Role-Model Thing? ” highlight the still distant presence of women in the development of STEM professions, a circumstance originating in the educational context and influenced, therefore, by traditional gender models and by social factors that have an impact on the construction of personal identities, as also evidenced by the work “ What Dominates the Female Class Identification? Evidence From China ”.

These constructed identities are revealed in the underestimation of the self-efficacy of secondary school students regarding their competences in STEM subjects, as shown in the work “ Parent and Teacher Depictions of Gender Gaps in Secondary Student Appraisals of Their Academic Competences ”. Consequently, the analysis of self-efficacy, expectations of results, interest in STEM areas and the intervention in the classrooms of plural female role models are proposed as necessary working spaces to redirect this trend. These results are completed with the analysis of the potential influence of gender stereotypes in biased student evaluations of teaching in “ Gender Stereotypes in Student Evaluations of Teaching ”.

From the area of Brazilian physical education, “ Gender Participation and Preference: A Multiple-Case Study on Teaching Circus at PE in Brazilians Schools ” reports on the elective influence of Primary Education teachers in the assignment of circus physical activities according to gender, extensible to the sports activities of traditional teaching. In order to advance in critical and emancipatory training proposals in gender equality in this area, “ Breaking Cultural ‘Taboos’ About the Body and Gender: Brazilian Students’ Emancipation From a Thematic Perspective of School Physical Education ” stresses the importance of teaching programs oriented to the cultural construction of the differential concept of the body. From this perspective, the work “ REFLECT—A Teacher Training Program to Promote Gender Equality in Schools ” emphasizes the hegemonic role of socializing agents in maintaining the status quo of gender stereotypes in education and in the future professional development of men and women. As a response to the permanence of the sex-gender system, and to the evidence of the influence of teachers’ attitudes and practices in the promotion of truly coeducational educational environments, this program, aimed at future teachers of Secondary Education, aims to contribute, in a sustainable way, to gender equality from the educational spaces of subjective action (such as self-efficacy), and objective action (teaching methods and knowledge).

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.

This Research Topic was completed with the main support of the Research Group Recognized in Didactics of History and Social Sciences (DHISO) (cod. 137), directed by Prof. Dr. Delfín Ortega-Sánchez (University of Burgos, Spain). Likewise, it has also been carried out within the framework of the projects Teach and learn to interpret contemporary problems and conflicts. What do social sciences contribute to the formation of a critical global citizenship? (EDU2016-80145-P), financed by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Spanish Government), and Future Education and Democratic Hope. Rethinking Social Studies Education in changing times (PID2019-107383RB-I00), financed by the Ministry of Science, and Innovation (Spanish Government).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Keywords: gender equality, teacher training, gender representation, gender stereotypes, higher education, primary and secondary education, early childhood education

Citation: Ortega-Sánchez D, Sanz de la Cal E, Ibáñez Quintana J and Borghi B (2022) Editorial: Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment in Education. Front. Educ. 7:833977. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.833977

Received: 12 December 2021; Accepted: 10 January 2022; Published: 26 January 2022.

Edited and reviewed by:

Copyright © 2022 Ortega-Sánchez, Sanz de la Cal, Ibáñez Quintana and Borghi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Delfín Ortega-Sánchez, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator

Paola belingheri.

1 Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Energia, dei Sistemi, del Territorio e delle Costruzioni, Università degli Studi di Pisa, Largo L. Lazzarino, Pisa, Italy

Filippo Chiarello

Andrea fronzetti colladon.

2 Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy

3 Department of Management, Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

Paola Rovelli

4 Faculty of Economics and Management, Centre for Family Business Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

Associated Data

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files. The only exception is the text of the abstracts (over 15,000) that we have downloaded from Scopus. These abstracts can be retrieved from Scopus, but we do not have permission to redistribute them.

Gender equality is a major problem that places women at a disadvantage thereby stymieing economic growth and societal advancement. In the last two decades, extensive research has been conducted on gender related issues, studying both their antecedents and consequences. However, existing literature reviews fail to provide a comprehensive and clear picture of what has been studied so far, which could guide scholars in their future research. Our paper offers a scoping review of a large portion of the research that has been published over the last 22 years, on gender equality and related issues, with a specific focus on business and economics studies. Combining innovative methods drawn from both network analysis and text mining, we provide a synthesis of 15,465 scientific articles. We identify 27 main research topics, we measure their relevance from a semantic point of view and the relationships among them, highlighting the importance of each topic in the overall gender discourse. We find that prominent research topics mostly relate to women in the workforce–e.g., concerning compensation, role, education, decision-making and career progression. However, some of them are losing momentum, and some other research trends–for example related to female entrepreneurship, leadership and participation in the board of directors–are on the rise. Besides introducing a novel methodology to review broad literature streams, our paper offers a map of the main gender-research trends and presents the most popular and the emerging themes, as well as their intersections, outlining important avenues for future research.

Introduction

The persistent gender inequalities that currently exist across the developed and developing world are receiving increasing attention from economists, policymakers, and the general public [e.g., 1 – 3 ]. Economic studies have indicated that women’s education and entry into the workforce contributes to social and economic well-being [e.g., 4 , 5 ], while their exclusion from the labor market and from managerial positions has an impact on overall labor productivity and income per capita [ 6 , 7 ]. The United Nations selected gender equality, with an emphasis on female education, as part of the Millennium Development Goals [ 8 ], and gender equality at-large as one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by 2030 [ 9 ]. These latter objectives involve not only developing nations, but rather all countries, to achieve economic, social and environmental well-being.

As is the case with many SDGs, gender equality is still far from being achieved and persists across education, access to opportunities, or presence in decision-making positions [ 7 , 10 , 11 ]. As we enter the last decade for the SDGs’ implementation, and while we are battling a global health pandemic, effective and efficient action becomes paramount to reach this ambitious goal.

Scholars have dedicated a massive effort towards understanding gender equality, its determinants, its consequences for women and society, and the appropriate actions and policies to advance women’s equality. Many topics have been covered, ranging from women’s education and human capital [ 12 , 13 ] and their role in society [e.g., 14 , 15 ], to their appointment in firms’ top ranked positions [e.g., 16 , 17 ] and performance implications [e.g., 18 , 19 ]. Despite some attempts, extant literature reviews provide a narrow view on these issues, restricted to specific topics–e.g., female students’ presence in STEM fields [ 20 ], educational gender inequality [ 5 ], the gender pay gap [ 21 ], the glass ceiling effect [ 22 ], leadership [ 23 ], entrepreneurship [ 24 ], women’s presence on the board of directors [ 25 , 26 ], diversity management [ 27 ], gender stereotypes in advertisement [ 28 ], or specific professions [ 29 ]. A comprehensive view on gender-related research, taking stock of key findings and under-studied topics is thus lacking.

Extant literature has also highlighted that gender issues, and their economic and social ramifications, are complex topics that involve a large number of possible antecedents and outcomes [ 7 ]. Indeed, gender equality actions are most effective when implemented in unison with other SDGs (e.g., with SDG 8, see [ 30 ]) in a synergetic perspective [ 10 ]. Many bodies of literature (e.g., business, economics, development studies, sociology and psychology) approach the problem of achieving gender equality from different perspectives–often addressing specific and narrow aspects. This sometimes leads to a lack of clarity about how different issues, circumstances, and solutions may be related in precipitating or mitigating gender inequality or its effects. As the number of papers grows at an increasing pace, this issue is exacerbated and there is a need to step back and survey the body of gender equality literature as a whole. There is also a need to examine synergies between different topics and approaches, as well as gaps in our understanding of how different problems and solutions work together. Considering the important topic of women’s economic and social empowerment, this paper aims to fill this gap by answering the following research question: what are the most relevant findings in the literature on gender equality and how do they relate to each other ?

To do so, we conduct a scoping review [ 31 ], providing a synthesis of 15,465 articles dealing with gender equity related issues published in the last twenty-two years, covering both the periods of the MDGs and the SDGs (i.e., 2000 to mid 2021) in all the journals indexed in the Academic Journal Guide’s 2018 ranking of business and economics journals. Given the huge amount of research conducted on the topic, we adopt an innovative methodology, which relies on social network analysis and text mining. These techniques are increasingly adopted when surveying large bodies of text. Recently, they were applied to perform analysis of online gender communication differences [ 32 ] and gender behaviors in online technology communities [ 33 ], to identify and classify sexual harassment instances in academia [ 34 ], and to evaluate the gender inclusivity of disaster management policies [ 35 ].

Applied to the title, abstracts and keywords of the articles in our sample, this methodology allows us to identify a set of 27 recurrent topics within which we automatically classify the papers. Introducing additional novelty, by means of the Semantic Brand Score (SBS) indicator [ 36 ] and the SBS BI app [ 37 ], we assess the importance of each topic in the overall gender equality discourse and its relationships with the other topics, as well as trends over time, with a more accurate description than that offered by traditional literature reviews relying solely on the number of papers presented in each topic.

This methodology, applied to gender equality research spanning the past twenty-two years, enables two key contributions. First, we extract the main message that each document is conveying and how this is connected to other themes in literature, providing a rich picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the emerging topics. Second, by examining the semantic relationship between topics and how tightly their discourses are linked, we can identify the key relationships and connections between different topics. This semi-automatic methodology is also highly reproducible with minimum effort.

This literature review is organized as follows. In the next section, we present how we selected relevant papers and how we analyzed them through text mining and social network analysis. We then illustrate the importance of 27 selected research topics, measured by means of the SBS indicator. In the results section, we present an overview of the literature based on the SBS results–followed by an in-depth narrative analysis of the top 10 topics (i.e., those with the highest SBS) and their connections. Subsequently, we highlight a series of under-studied connections between the topics where there is potential for future research. Through this analysis, we build a map of the main gender-research trends in the last twenty-two years–presenting the most popular themes. We conclude by highlighting key areas on which research should focused in the future.

Our aim is to map a broad topic, gender equality research, that has been approached through a host of different angles and through different disciplines. Scoping reviews are the most appropriate as they provide the freedom to map different themes and identify literature gaps, thereby guiding the recommendation of new research agendas [ 38 ].

Several practical approaches have been proposed to identify and assess the underlying topics of a specific field using big data [ 39 – 41 ], but many of them fail without proper paper retrieval and text preprocessing. This is specifically true for a research field such as the gender-related one, which comprises the work of scholars from different backgrounds. In this section, we illustrate a novel approach for the analysis of scientific (gender-related) papers that relies on methods and tools of social network analysis and text mining. Our procedure has four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) text preprocessing, (3) keywords extraction and classification, and (4) evaluation of semantic importance and image.

Data collection

In this study, we analyze 22 years of literature on gender-related research. Following established practice for scoping reviews [ 42 ], our data collection consisted of two main steps, which we summarize here below.

Firstly, we retrieved from the Scopus database all the articles written in English that contained the term “gender” in their title, abstract or keywords and were published in a journal listed in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) ( https://charteredabs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/AJG2018-Methodology.pdf ), considering the time period from Jan 2000 to May 2021. We used this information considering that abstracts, titles and keywords represent the most informative part of a paper, while using the full-text would increase the signal-to-noise ratio for information extraction. Indeed, these textual elements already demonstrated to be reliable sources of information for the task of domain lexicon extraction [ 43 , 44 ]. We chose Scopus as source of literature because of its popularity, its update rate, and because it offers an API to ease the querying process. Indeed, while it does not allow to retrieve the full text of scientific articles, the Scopus API offers access to titles, abstracts, citation information and metadata for all its indexed scholarly journals. Moreover, we decided to focus on the journals listed in the AJG 2018 ranking because we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies only. The AJG is indeed widely used by universities and business schools as a reference point for journal and research rigor and quality. This first step, executed in June 2021, returned more than 55,000 papers.

In the second step–because a look at the papers showed very sparse results, many of which were not in line with the topic of this literature review (e.g., papers dealing with health care or medical issues, where the word gender indicates the gender of the patients)–we applied further inclusion criteria to make the sample more focused on the topic of this literature review (i.e., women’s gender equality issues). Specifically, we only retained those papers mentioning, in their title and/or abstract, both gender-related keywords (e.g., daughter, female, mother) and keywords referring to bias and equality issues (e.g., equality, bias, diversity, inclusion). After text pre-processing (see next section), keywords were first identified from a frequency-weighted list of words found in the titles, abstracts and keywords in the initial list of papers, extracted through text mining (following the same approach as [ 43 ]). They were selected by two of the co-authors independently, following respectively a bottom up and a top-down approach. The bottom-up approach consisted of examining the words found in the frequency-weighted list and classifying those related to gender and equality. The top-down approach consisted in searching in the word list for notable gender and equality-related words. Table 1 reports the sets of keywords we considered, together with some examples of words that were used to search for their presence in the dataset (a full list is provided in the S1 Text ). At end of this second step, we obtained a final sample of 15,465 relevant papers.

Text processing and keyword extraction

Text preprocessing aims at structuring text into a form that can be analyzed by statistical models. In the present section, we describe the preprocessing steps we applied to paper titles and abstracts, which, as explained below, partially follow a standard text preprocessing pipeline [ 45 ]. These activities have been performed using the R package udpipe [ 46 ].

The first step is n-gram extraction (i.e., a sequence of words from a given text sample) to identify which n-grams are important in the analysis, since domain-specific lexicons are often composed by bi-grams and tri-grams [ 47 ]. Multi-word extraction is usually implemented with statistics and linguistic rules, thus using the statistical properties of n-grams or machine learning approaches [ 48 ]. However, for the present paper, we used Scopus metadata in order to have a more effective and efficient n-grams collection approach [ 49 ]. We used the keywords of each paper in order to tag n-grams with their associated keywords automatically. Using this greedy approach, it was possible to collect all the keywords listed by the authors of the papers. From this list, we extracted only keywords composed by two, three and four words, we removed all the acronyms and rare keywords (i.e., appearing in less than 1% of papers), and we clustered keywords showing a high orthographic similarity–measured using a Levenshtein distance [ 50 ] lower than 2, considering these groups of keywords as representing same concepts, but expressed with different spelling. After tagging the n-grams in the abstracts, we followed a common data preparation pipeline that consists of the following steps: (i) tokenization, that splits the text into tokens (i.e., single words and previously tagged multi-words); (ii) removal of stop-words (i.e. those words that add little meaning to the text, usually being very common and short functional words–such as “and”, “or”, or “of”); (iii) parts-of-speech tagging, that is providing information concerning the morphological role of a word and its morphosyntactic context (e.g., if the token is a determiner, the next token is a noun or an adjective with very high confidence, [ 51 ]); and (iv) lemmatization, which consists in substituting each word with its dictionary form (or lemma). The output of the latter step allows grouping together the inflected forms of a word. For example, the verbs “am”, “are”, and “is” have the shared lemma “be”, or the nouns “cat” and “cats” both share the lemma “cat”. We preferred lemmatization over stemming [ 52 ] in order to obtain more interpretable results.

In addition, we identified a further set of keywords (with respect to those listed in the “keywords” field) by applying a series of automatic words unification and removal steps, as suggested in past research [ 53 , 54 ]. We removed: sparse terms (i.e., occurring in less than 0.1% of all documents), common terms (i.e., occurring in more than 10% of all documents) and retained only nouns and adjectives. It is relevant to notice that no document was lost due to these steps. We then used the TF-IDF function [ 55 ] to produce a new list of keywords. We additionally tested other approaches for the identification and clustering of keywords–such as TextRank [ 56 ] or Latent Dirichlet Allocation [ 57 ]–without obtaining more informative results.

Classification of research topics

To guide the literature analysis, two experts met regularly to examine the sample of collected papers and to identify the main topics and trends in gender research. Initially, they conducted brainstorming sessions on the topics they expected to find, due to their knowledge of the literature. This led to an initial list of topics. Subsequently, the experts worked independently, also supported by the keywords in paper titles and abstracts extracted with the procedure described above.

Considering all this information, each expert identified and clustered relevant keywords into topics. At the end of the process, the two assignments were compared and exhibited a 92% agreement. Another meeting was held to discuss discordant cases and reach a consensus. This resulted in a list of 27 topics, briefly introduced in Table 2 and subsequently detailed in the following sections.

Evaluation of semantic importance

Working on the lemmatized corpus of the 15,465 papers included in our sample, we proceeded with the evaluation of semantic importance trends for each topic and with the analysis of their connections and prevalent textual associations. To this aim, we used the Semantic Brand Score indicator [ 36 ], calculated through the SBS BI webapp [ 37 ] that also produced a brand image report for each topic. For this study we relied on the computing resources of the ENEA/CRESCO infrastructure [ 58 ].

The Semantic Brand Score (SBS) is a measure of semantic importance that combines methods of social network analysis and text mining. It is usually applied for the analysis of (big) textual data to evaluate the importance of one or more brands, names, words, or sets of keywords [ 36 ]. Indeed, the concept of “brand” is intended in a flexible way and goes beyond products or commercial brands. In this study, we evaluate the SBS time-trends of the keywords defining the research topics discussed in the previous section. Semantic importance comprises the three dimensions of topic prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Prevalence measures how frequently a research topic is used in the discourse. The more a topic is mentioned by scientific articles, the more the research community will be aware of it, with possible increase of future studies; this construct is partly related to that of brand awareness [ 59 ]. This effect is even stronger, considering that we are analyzing the title, abstract and keywords of the papers, i.e. the parts that have the highest visibility. A very important characteristic of the SBS is that it considers the relationships among words in a text. Topic importance is not just a matter of how frequently a topic is mentioned, but also of the associations a topic has in the text. Specifically, texts are transformed into networks of co-occurring words, and relationships are studied through social network analysis [ 60 ]. This step is necessary to calculate the other two dimensions of our semantic importance indicator. Accordingly, a social network of words is generated for each time period considered in the analysis–i.e., a graph made of n nodes (words) and E edges weighted by co-occurrence frequency, with W being the set of edge weights. The keywords representing each topic were clustered into single nodes.

The construct of diversity relates to that of brand image [ 59 ], in the sense that it considers the richness and distinctiveness of textual (topic) associations. Considering the above-mentioned networks, we calculated diversity using the distinctiveness centrality metric–as in the formula presented by Fronzetti Colladon and Naldi [ 61 ].

Lastly, connectivity was measured as the weighted betweenness centrality [ 62 , 63 ] of each research topic node. We used the formula presented by Wasserman and Faust [ 60 ]. The dimension of connectivity represents the “brokerage power” of each research topic–i.e., how much it can serve as a bridge to connect other terms (and ultimately topics) in the discourse [ 36 ].

The SBS is the final composite indicator obtained by summing the standardized scores of prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Standardization was carried out considering all the words in the corpus, for each specific timeframe.

This methodology, applied to a large and heterogeneous body of text, enables to automatically identify two important sets of information that add value to the literature review. Firstly, the relevance of each topic in literature is measured through a composite indicator of semantic importance, rather than simply looking at word frequencies. This provides a much richer picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the topics that are emerging in the literature. Secondly, it enables to examine the extent of the semantic relationship between topics, looking at how tightly their discourses are linked. In a field such as gender equality, where many topics are closely linked to each other and present overlaps in issues and solutions, this methodology offers a novel perspective with respect to traditional literature reviews. In addition, it ensures reproducibility over time and the possibility to semi-automatically update the analysis, as new papers become available.

Overview of main topics

In terms of descriptive textual statistics, our corpus is made of 15,465 text documents, consisting of a total of 2,685,893 lemmatized tokens (words) and 32,279 types. As a result, the type-token ratio is 1.2%. The number of hapaxes is 12,141, with a hapax-token ratio of 37.61%.

Fig 1 shows the list of 27 topics by decreasing SBS. The most researched topic is compensation , exceeding all others in prevalence, diversity, and connectivity. This means it is not only mentioned more often than other topics, but it is also connected to a greater number of other topics and is central to the discourse on gender equality. The next four topics are, in order of SBS, role , education , decision-making , and career progression . These topics, except for education , all concern women in the workforce. Between these first five topics and the following ones there is a clear drop in SBS scores. In particular, the topics that follow have a lower connectivity than the first five. They are hiring , performance , behavior , organization , and human capital . Again, except for behavior and human capital , the other three topics are purely related to women in the workforce. After another drop-off, the following topics deal prevalently with women in society. This trend highlights that research on gender in business journals has so far mainly paid attention to the conditions that women experience in business contexts, while also devoting some attention to women in society.

Fig 2 shows the SBS time series of the top 10 topics. While there has been a general increase in the number of Scopus-indexed publications in the last decade, we notice that some SBS trends remain steady, or even decrease. In particular, we observe that the main topic of the last twenty-two years, compensation , is losing momentum. Since 2016, it has been surpassed by decision-making , education and role , which may indicate that literature is increasingly attempting to identify root causes of compensation inequalities. Moreover, in the last two years, the topics of hiring , performance , and organization are experiencing the largest importance increase.

Fig 3 shows the SBS time trends of the remaining 17 topics (i.e., those not in the top 10). As we can see from the graph, there are some that maintain a steady trend–such as reputation , management , networks and governance , which also seem to have little importance. More relevant topics with average stationary trends (except for the last two years) are culture , family , and parenting . The feminine topic is among the most important here, and one of those that exhibit the larger variations over time (similarly to leadership ). On the other hand, the are some topics that, even if not among the most important, show increasing SBS trends; therefore, they could be considered as emerging topics and could become popular in the near future. These are entrepreneurship , leadership , board of directors , and sustainability . These emerging topics are also interesting to anticipate future trends in gender equality research that are conducive to overall equality in society.

In addition to the SBS score of the different topics, the network of terms they are associated to enables to gauge the extent to which their images (textual associations) overlap or differ ( Fig 4 ).

There is a central cluster of topics with high similarity, which are all connected with women in the workforce. The cluster includes topics such as organization , decision-making , performance , hiring , human capital , education and compensation . In addition, the topic of well-being is found within this cluster, suggesting that women’s equality in the workforce is associated to well-being considerations. The emerging topics of entrepreneurship and leadership are also closely connected with each other, possibly implying that leadership is a much-researched quality in female entrepreneurship. Topics that are relatively more distant include personality , politics , feminine , empowerment , management , board of directors , reputation , governance , parenting , masculine and network .

The following sections describe the top 10 topics and their main associations in literature (see Table 3 ), while providing a brief overview of the emerging topics.

Compensation

The topic of compensation is related to the topics of role , hiring , education and career progression , however, also sees a very high association with the words gap and inequality . Indeed, a well-known debate in degrowth economics centers around whether and how to adequately compensate women for their childbearing, childrearing, caregiver and household work [e.g., 30 ].

Even in paid work, women continue being offered lower compensations than their male counterparts who have the same job or cover the same role [ 64 – 67 ]. This severe inequality has been widely studied by scholars over the last twenty-two years. Dealing with this topic, some specific roles have been addressed. Specifically, research highlighted differences in compensation between female and male CEOs [e.g., 68 ], top executives [e.g., 69 ], and boards’ directors [e.g., 70 ]. Scholars investigated the determinants of these gaps, such as the gender composition of the board [e.g., 71 – 73 ] or women’s individual characteristics [e.g., 71 , 74 ].

Among these individual characteristics, education plays a relevant role [ 75 ]. Education is indeed presented as the solution for women, not only to achieve top executive roles, but also to reduce wage inequality [e.g., 76 , 77 ]. Past research has highlighted education influences on gender wage gaps, specifically referring to gender differences in skills [e.g., 78 ], college majors [e.g., 79 ], and college selectivity [e.g., 80 ].

Finally, the wage gap issue is strictly interrelated with hiring –e.g., looking at whether being a mother affects hiring and compensation [e.g., 65 , 81 ] or relating compensation to unemployment [e.g., 82 ]–and career progression –for instance looking at meritocracy [ 83 , 84 ] or the characteristics of the boss for whom women work [e.g., 85 ].

The roles covered by women have been deeply investigated. Scholars have focused on the role of women in their families and the society as a whole [e.g., 14 , 15 ], and, more widely, in business contexts [e.g., 18 , 81 ]. Indeed, despite still lagging behind their male counterparts [e.g., 86 , 87 ], in the last decade there has been an increase in top ranked positions achieved by women [e.g., 88 , 89 ]. Following this phenomenon, scholars have posed greater attention towards the presence of women in the board of directors [e.g., 16 , 18 , 90 , 91 ], given the increasing pressure to appoint female directors that firms, especially listed ones, have experienced. Other scholars have focused on the presence of women covering the role of CEO [e.g., 17 , 92 ] or being part of the top management team [e.g., 93 ]. Irrespectively of the level of analysis, all these studies tried to uncover the antecedents of women’s presence among top managers [e.g., 92 , 94 ] and the consequences of having a them involved in the firm’s decision-making –e.g., on performance [e.g., 19 , 95 , 96 ], risk [e.g., 97 , 98 ], and corporate social responsibility [e.g., 99 , 100 ].

Besides studying the difficulties and discriminations faced by women in getting a job [ 81 , 101 ], and, more specifically in the hiring , appointment, or career progression to these apical roles [e.g., 70 , 83 ], the majority of research of women’s roles dealt with compensation issues. Specifically, scholars highlight the pay-gap that still exists between women and men, both in general [e.g., 64 , 65 ], as well as referring to boards’ directors [e.g., 70 , 102 ], CEOs and executives [e.g., 69 , 103 , 104 ].

Finally, other scholars focused on the behavior of women when dealing with business. In this sense, particular attention has been paid to leadership and entrepreneurial behaviors. The former quite overlaps with dealing with the roles mentioned above, but also includes aspects such as leaders being stereotyped as masculine [e.g., 105 ], the need for greater exposure to female leaders to reduce biases [e.g., 106 ], or female leaders acting as queen bees [e.g., 107 ]. Regarding entrepreneurship , scholars mainly investigated women’s entrepreneurial entry [e.g., 108 , 109 ], differences between female and male entrepreneurs in the evaluations and funding received from investors [e.g., 110 , 111 ], and their performance gap [e.g., 112 , 113 ].

Education has long been recognized as key to social advancement and economic stability [ 114 ], for job progression and also a barrier to gender equality, especially in STEM-related fields. Research on education and gender equality is mostly linked with the topics of compensation , human capital , career progression , hiring , parenting and decision-making .

Education contributes to a higher human capital [ 115 ] and constitutes an investment on the part of women towards their future. In this context, literature points to the gender gap in educational attainment, and the consequences for women from a social, economic, personal and professional standpoint. Women are found to have less access to formal education and information, especially in emerging countries, which in turn may cause them to lose social and economic opportunities [e.g., 12 , 116 – 119 ]. Education in local and rural communities is also paramount to communicate the benefits of female empowerment , contributing to overall societal well-being [e.g., 120 ].

Once women access education, the image they have of the world and their place in society (i.e., habitus) affects their education performance [ 13 ] and is passed on to their children. These situations reinforce gender stereotypes, which become self-fulfilling prophecies that may negatively affect female students’ performance by lowering their confidence and heightening their anxiety [ 121 , 122 ]. Besides formal education, also the information that women are exposed to on a daily basis contributes to their human capital . Digital inequalities, for instance, stems from men spending more time online and acquiring higher digital skills than women [ 123 ].

Education is also a factor that should boost employability of candidates and thus hiring , career progression and compensation , however the relationship between these factors is not straightforward [ 115 ]. First, educational choices ( decision-making ) are influenced by variables such as self-efficacy and the presence of barriers, irrespectively of the career opportunities they offer, especially in STEM [ 124 ]. This brings additional difficulties to women’s enrollment and persistence in scientific and technical fields of study due to stereotypes and biases [ 125 , 126 ]. Moreover, access to education does not automatically translate into job opportunities for women and minority groups [ 127 , 128 ] or into female access to managerial positions [ 129 ].

Finally, parenting is reported as an antecedent of education [e.g., 130 ], with much of the literature focusing on the role of parents’ education on the opportunities afforded to children to enroll in education [ 131 – 134 ] and the role of parenting in their offspring’s perception of study fields and attitudes towards learning [ 135 – 138 ]. Parental education is also a predictor of the other related topics, namely human capital and compensation [ 139 ].

Decision-making

This literature mainly points to the fact that women are thought to make decisions differently than men. Women have indeed different priorities, such as they care more about people’s well-being, working with people or helping others, rather than maximizing their personal (or their firm’s) gain [ 140 ]. In other words, women typically present more communal than agentic behaviors, which are instead more frequent among men [ 141 ]. These different attitude, behavior and preferences in turn affect the decisions they make [e.g., 142 ] and the decision-making of the firm in which they work [e.g., 143 ].

At the individual level, gender affects, for instance, career aspirations [e.g., 144 ] and choices [e.g., 142 , 145 ], or the decision of creating a venture [e.g., 108 , 109 , 146 ]. Moreover, in everyday life, women and men make different decisions regarding partners [e.g., 147 ], childcare [e.g., 148 ], education [e.g., 149 ], attention to the environment [e.g., 150 ] and politics [e.g., 151 ].

At the firm level, scholars highlighted, for example, how the presence of women in the board affects corporate decisions [e.g., 152 , 153 ], that female CEOs are more conservative in accounting decisions [e.g., 154 ], or that female CFOs tend to make more conservative decisions regarding the firm’s financial reporting [e.g., 155 ]. Nevertheless, firm level research also investigated decisions that, influenced by gender bias, affect women, such as those pertaining hiring [e.g., 156 , 157 ], compensation [e.g., 73 , 158 ], or the empowerment of women once appointed [ 159 ].

Career progression

Once women have entered the workforce, the key aspect to achieve gender equality becomes career progression , including efforts toward overcoming the glass ceiling. Indeed, according to the SBS analysis, career progression is highly related to words such as work, social issues and equality. The topic with which it has the highest semantic overlap is role , followed by decision-making , hiring , education , compensation , leadership , human capital , and family .

Career progression implies an advancement in the hierarchical ladder of the firm, assigning managerial roles to women. Coherently, much of the literature has focused on identifying rationales for a greater female participation in the top management team and board of directors [e.g., 95 ] as well as the best criteria to ensure that the decision-makers promote the most valuable employees irrespectively of their individual characteristics, such as gender [e.g., 84 ]. The link between career progression , role and compensation is often provided in practice by performance appraisal exercises, frequently rooted in a culture of meritocracy that guides bonuses, salary increases and promotions. However, performance appraisals can actually mask gender-biased decisions where women are held to higher standards than their male colleagues [e.g., 83 , 84 , 95 , 160 , 161 ]. Women often have less opportunities to gain leadership experience and are less visible than their male colleagues, which constitute barriers to career advancement [e.g., 162 ]. Therefore, transparency and accountability, together with procedures that discourage discretionary choices, are paramount to achieve a fair career progression [e.g., 84 ], together with the relaxation of strict job boundaries in favor of cross-functional and self-directed tasks [e.g., 163 ].

In addition, a series of stereotypes about the type of leadership characteristics that are required for top management positions, which fit better with typical male and agentic attributes, are another key barrier to career advancement for women [e.g., 92 , 160 ].

Hiring is the entrance gateway for women into the workforce. Therefore, it is related to other workforce topics such as compensation , role , career progression , decision-making , human capital , performance , organization and education .

A first stream of literature focuses on the process leading up to candidates’ job applications, demonstrating that bias exists before positions are even opened, and it is perpetuated both by men and women through networking and gatekeeping practices [e.g., 164 , 165 ].

The hiring process itself is also subject to biases [ 166 ], for example gender-congruity bias that leads to men being preferred candidates in male-dominated sectors [e.g., 167 ], women being hired in positions with higher risk of failure [e.g., 168 ] and limited transparency and accountability afforded by written processes and procedures [e.g., 164 ] that all contribute to ascriptive inequality. In addition, providing incentives for evaluators to hire women may actually work to this end; however, this is not the case when supporting female candidates endangers higher-ranking male ones [ 169 ].

Another interesting perspective, instead, looks at top management teams’ composition and the effects on hiring practices, indicating that firms with more women in top management are less likely to lay off staff [e.g., 152 ].

Performance

Several scholars posed their attention towards women’s performance, its consequences [e.g., 170 , 171 ] and the implications of having women in decision-making positions [e.g., 18 , 19 ].

At the individual level, research focused on differences in educational and academic performance between women and men, especially referring to the gender gap in STEM fields [e.g., 171 ]. The presence of stereotype threats–that is the expectation that the members of a social group (e.g., women) “must deal with the possibility of being judged or treated stereotypically, or of doing something that would confirm the stereotype” [ 172 ]–affects women’s interested in STEM [e.g., 173 ], as well as their cognitive ability tests, penalizing them [e.g., 174 ]. A stronger gender identification enhances this gap [e.g., 175 ], whereas mentoring and role models can be used as solutions to this problem [e.g., 121 ]. Despite the negative effect of stereotype threats on girls’ performance [ 176 ], female and male students perform equally in mathematics and related subjects [e.g., 177 ]. Moreover, while individuals’ performance at school and university generally affects their achievements and the field in which they end up working, evidence reveals that performance in math or other scientific subjects does not explain why fewer women enter STEM working fields; rather this gap depends on other aspects, such as culture, past working experiences, or self-efficacy [e.g., 170 ]. Finally, scholars have highlighted the penalization that women face for their positive performance, for instance when they succeed in traditionally male areas [e.g., 178 ]. This penalization is explained by the violation of gender-stereotypic prescriptions [e.g., 179 , 180 ], that is having women well performing in agentic areas, which are typical associated to men. Performance penalization can thus be overcome by clearly conveying communal characteristics and behaviors [ 178 ].

Evidence has been provided on how the involvement of women in boards of directors and decision-making positions affects firms’ performance. Nevertheless, results are mixed, with some studies showing positive effects on financial [ 19 , 181 , 182 ] and corporate social performance [ 99 , 182 , 183 ]. Other studies maintain a negative association [e.g., 18 ], and other again mixed [e.g., 184 ] or non-significant association [e.g., 185 ]. Also with respect to the presence of a female CEO, mixed results emerged so far, with some researches demonstrating a positive effect on firm’s performance [e.g., 96 , 186 ], while other obtaining only a limited evidence of this relationship [e.g., 103 ] or a negative one [e.g., 187 ].

Finally, some studies have investigated whether and how women’s performance affects their hiring [e.g., 101 ] and career progression [e.g., 83 , 160 ]. For instance, academic performance leads to different returns in hiring for women and men. Specifically, high-achieving men are called back significantly more often than high-achieving women, which are penalized when they have a major in mathematics; this result depends on employers’ gendered standards for applicants [e.g., 101 ]. Once appointed, performance ratings are more strongly related to promotions for women than men, and promoted women typically show higher past performance ratings than those of promoted men. This suggesting that women are subject to stricter standards for promotion [e.g., 160 ].

Behavioral aspects related to gender follow two main streams of literature. The first examines female personality and behavior in the workplace, and their alignment with cultural expectations or stereotypes [e.g., 188 ] as well as their impacts on equality. There is a common bias that depicts women as less agentic than males. Certain characteristics, such as those more congruent with male behaviors–e.g., self-promotion [e.g., 189 ], negotiation skills [e.g., 190 ] and general agentic behavior [e.g., 191 ]–, are less accepted in women. However, characteristics such as individualism in women have been found to promote greater gender equality in society [ 192 ]. In addition, behaviors such as display of emotions [e.g., 193 ], which are stereotypically female, work against women’s acceptance in the workplace, requiring women to carefully moderate their behavior to avoid exclusion. A counter-intuitive result is that women and minorities, which are more marginalized in the workplace, tend to be better problem-solvers in innovation competitions due to their different knowledge bases [ 194 ].

The other side of the coin is examined in a parallel literature stream on behavior towards women in the workplace. As a result of biases, prejudices and stereotypes, women may experience adverse behavior from their colleagues, such as incivility and harassment, which undermine their well-being [e.g., 195 , 196 ]. Biases that go beyond gender, such as for overweight people, are also more strongly applied to women [ 197 ].

Organization

The role of women and gender bias in organizations has been studied from different perspectives, which mirror those presented in detail in the following sections. Specifically, most research highlighted the stereotypical view of leaders [e.g., 105 ] and the roles played by women within firms, for instance referring to presence in the board of directors [e.g., 18 , 90 , 91 ], appointment as CEOs [e.g., 16 ], or top executives [e.g., 93 ].

Scholars have investigated antecedents and consequences of the presence of women in these apical roles. On the one side they looked at hiring and career progression [e.g., 83 , 92 , 160 , 168 , 198 ], finding women typically disadvantaged with respect to their male counterparts. On the other side, they studied women’s leadership styles and influence on the firm’s decision-making [e.g., 152 , 154 , 155 , 199 ], with implications for performance [e.g., 18 , 19 , 96 ].

Human capital

Human capital is a transverse topic that touches upon many different aspects of female gender equality. As such, it has the most associations with other topics, starting with education as mentioned above, with career-related topics such as role , decision-making , hiring , career progression , performance , compensation , leadership and organization . Another topic with which there is a close connection is behavior . In general, human capital is approached both from the education standpoint but also from the perspective of social capital.

The behavioral aspect in human capital comprises research related to gender differences for example in cultural and religious beliefs that influence women’s attitudes and perceptions towards STEM subjects [ 142 , 200 – 202 ], towards employment [ 203 ] or towards environmental issues [ 150 , 204 ]. These cultural differences also emerge in the context of globalization which may accelerate gender equality in the workforce [ 205 , 206 ]. Gender differences also appear in behaviors such as motivation [ 207 ], and in negotiation [ 190 ], and have repercussions on women’s decision-making related to their careers. The so-called gender equality paradox sees women in countries with lower gender equality more likely to pursue studies and careers in STEM fields, whereas the gap in STEM enrollment widens as countries achieve greater equality in society [ 171 ].

Career progression is modeled by literature as a choice-process where personal preferences, culture and decision-making affect the chosen path and the outcomes. Some literature highlights how women tend to self-select into different professions than men, often due to stereotypes rather than actual ability to perform in these professions [ 142 , 144 ]. These stereotypes also affect the perceptions of female performance or the amount of human capital required to equal male performance [ 110 , 193 , 208 ], particularly for mothers [ 81 ]. It is therefore often assumed that women are better suited to less visible and less leadership -oriented roles [ 209 ]. Women also express differing preferences towards work-family balance, which affect whether and how they pursue human capital gains [ 210 ], and ultimately their career progression and salary .

On the other hand, men are often unaware of gendered processes and behaviors that they carry forward in their interactions and decision-making [ 211 , 212 ]. Therefore, initiatives aimed at increasing managers’ human capital –by raising awareness of gender disparities in their organizations and engaging them in diversity promotion–are essential steps to counter gender bias and segregation [ 213 ].

Emerging topics: Leadership and entrepreneurship

Among the emerging topics, the most pervasive one is women reaching leadership positions in the workforce and in society. This is still a rare occurrence for two main types of factors, on the one hand, bias and discrimination make it harder for women to access leadership positions [e.g., 214 – 216 ], on the other hand, the competitive nature and high pressure associated with leadership positions, coupled with the lack of women currently represented, reduce women’s desire to achieve them [e.g., 209 , 217 ]. Women are more effective leaders when they have access to education, resources and a diverse environment with representation [e.g., 218 , 219 ].

One sector where there is potential for women to carve out a leadership role is entrepreneurship . Although at the start of the millennium the discourse on entrepreneurship was found to be “discriminatory, gender-biased, ethnocentrically determined and ideologically controlled” [ 220 ], an increasing body of literature is studying how to stimulate female entrepreneurship as an alternative pathway to wealth, leadership and empowerment [e.g., 221 ]. Many barriers exist for women to access entrepreneurship, including the institutional and legal environment, social and cultural factors, access to knowledge and resources, and individual behavior [e.g., 222 , 223 ]. Education has been found to raise women’s entrepreneurial intentions [e.g., 224 ], although this effect is smaller than for men [e.g., 109 ]. In addition, increasing self-efficacy and risk-taking behavior constitute important success factors [e.g., 225 ].

Finally, the topic of sustainability is worth mentioning, as it is the primary objective of the SDGs and is closely associated with societal well-being. As society grapples with the effects of climate change and increasing depletion of natural resources, a narrative has emerged on women and their greater link to the environment [ 226 ]. Studies in developed countries have found some support for women leaders’ attention to sustainability issues in firms [e.g., 227 – 229 ], and smaller resource consumption by women [ 230 ]. At the same time, women will likely be more affected by the consequences of climate change [e.g., 230 ] but often lack the decision-making power to influence local decision-making on resource management and environmental policies [e.g., 231 ].

Research gaps and conclusions

Research on gender equality has advanced rapidly in the past decades, with a steady increase in publications, both in mainstream topics related to women in education and the workforce, and in emerging topics. Through a novel approach combining methods of text mining and social network analysis, we examined a comprehensive body of literature comprising 15,465 papers published between 2000 and mid 2021 on topics related to gender equality. We identified a set of 27 topics addressed by the literature and examined their connections.

At the highest level of abstraction, it is worth noting that papers abound on the identification of issues related to gender inequalities and imbalances in the workforce and in society. Literature has thoroughly examined the (unconscious) biases, barriers, stereotypes, and discriminatory behaviors that women are facing as a result of their gender. Instead, there are much fewer papers that discuss or demonstrate effective solutions to overcome gender bias [e.g., 121 , 143 , 145 , 163 , 194 , 213 , 232 ]. This is partly due to the relative ease in studying the status quo, as opposed to studying changes in the status quo. However, we observed a shift in the more recent years towards solution seeking in this domain, which we strongly encourage future researchers to focus on. In the future, we may focus on collecting and mapping pro-active contributions to gender studies, using additional Natural Language Processing techniques, able to measure the sentiment of scientific papers [ 43 ].

All of the mainstream topics identified in our literature review are closely related, and there is a wealth of insights looking at the intersection between issues such as education and career progression or human capital and role . However, emerging topics are worthy of being furtherly explored. It would be interesting to see more work on the topic of female entrepreneurship , exploring aspects such as education , personality , governance , management and leadership . For instance, how can education support female entrepreneurship? How can self-efficacy and risk-taking behaviors be taught or enhanced? What are the differences in managerial and governance styles of female entrepreneurs? Which personality traits are associated with successful entrepreneurs? Which traits are preferred by venture capitalists and funding bodies?

The emerging topic of sustainability also deserves further attention, as our society struggles with climate change and its consequences. It would be interesting to see more research on the intersection between sustainability and entrepreneurship , looking at how female entrepreneurs are tackling sustainability issues, examining both their business models and their company governance . In addition, scholars are suggested to dig deeper into the relationship between family values and behaviors.

Moreover, it would be relevant to understand how women’s networks (social capital), or the composition and structure of social networks involving both women and men, enable them to increase their remuneration and reach top corporate positions, participate in key decision-making bodies, and have a voice in communities. Furthermore, the achievement of gender equality might significantly change firm networks and ecosystems, with important implications for their performance and survival.

Similarly, research at the nexus of (corporate) governance , career progression , compensation and female empowerment could yield useful insights–for example discussing how enterprises, institutions and countries are managed and the impact for women and other minorities. Are there specific governance structures that favor diversity and inclusion?

Lastly, we foresee an emerging stream of research pertaining how the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged women, especially in the workforce, by making gender biases more evident.

For our analysis, we considered a set of 15,465 articles downloaded from the Scopus database (which is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature). As we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies, we only considered those papers published in journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide (AJG) 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). All the journals listed in this ranking are also indexed by Scopus. Therefore, looking at a single database (i.e., Scopus) should not be considered a limitation of our study. However, future research could consider different databases and inclusion criteria.

With our literature review, we offer researchers a comprehensive map of major gender-related research trends over the past twenty-two years. This can serve as a lens to look to the future, contributing to the achievement of SDG5. Researchers may use our study as a starting point to identify key themes addressed in the literature. In addition, our methodological approach–based on the use of the Semantic Brand Score and its webapp–could support scholars interested in reviewing other areas of research.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments.

The computing resources and the related technical support used for this work have been provided by CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure and its staff. CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure is funded by ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development and by Italian and European research programmes (see http://www.cresco.enea.it/english for information).

Funding Statement

P.B and F.C.: Grant of the Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction of the University of Pisa (DESTEC) for the project “Measuring Gender Bias with Semantic Analysis: The Development of an Assessment Tool and its Application in the European Space Industry. P.B., F.C., A.F.C., P.R.: Grant of the Italian Association of Management Engineering (AiIG), “Misure di sostegno ai soci giovani AiIG” 2020, for the project “Gender Equality Through Data Intelligence (GEDI)”. F.C.: EU project ASSETs+ Project (Alliance for Strategic Skills addressing Emerging Technologies in Defence) EAC/A03/2018 - Erasmus+ programme, Sector Skills Alliances, Lot 3: Sector Skills Alliance for implementing a new strategic approach (Blueprint) to sectoral cooperation on skills G.A. NUMBER: 612678-EPP-1-2019-1-IT-EPPKA2-SSA-B.

Data Availability

• DOI: 10.2991/assehr.k.210617.134
• Corpus ID: 237919744

The Literature Review of Gender Discriminations in Schools, Families, and Workplaces

• Published in Proceedings of the 2nd… 20 June 2021
• Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Mental Health and Humanities Education（ICMHHE 2021）

17 References

Feminist organizing around gender discrimination lawsuits in higher education, gender discrimination and the workplace: an examination of rational bias theory, unequal depression for equal work how the wage gap explains gendered disparities in mood disorders., gender discrimination, victimisation and women's mental health., effects of the one-child family policy on second and third births in hebei, shaanxi and shanghai, son preference in anhui province china., gender of children, bargaining power, and intrahousehold resource allocation in china, failing at fairness : how our schools cheat girls, gender: psychological perspectives, one quarter of humanity: malthusian mythology and chinese realities, 1700-2000, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Download Free PDF

Gender Equity in Education: A Review of the Literature

Free related PDFs Related papers

Childhood Education, 2019

Teachers College Record, 2003

RePEc: Research Papers in Economics, 2019

A sizable body of literature has concluded that males do better in math compared with females. Although differences have narrowed over time, generally speaking males do better on standardized test scores. However, there is no agreement on when such disparity appears and how big the differences are. This paper explores at what point during elementary school gender differences appear, when these become significant and how the gap evolves as children progress at early years. To explain differences by gender, math scores are used. Data comes from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Program (ECLS-K) in the USA. Longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis are conducted. Gender gaps are decomposed through the use of ñopo-match. Results show that gender gaps are almost inexistent at the beginning of schooling but they broaden rapidly. Between first and fifth grade, gender gaps increase by 60.8%. The unexplained components of gender differences increase over time, which suggests that the importance of socioeconomic and school factors decreases as children progress in the school.

Annu. Rev. Sociol, 2008

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

Sida Gender Toolbox Brief, 2017

European Journal of Psychology of …, 2012

The Sociological Quarterly, 2005

Cogent Education

Center on Education Policy, 2010

International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 2013

Journal of Human Resources, 2013

International Journal of Research Publications

American Educational Research Journal

Related topics

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator

Contributed equally to this work with: Paola Belingheri, Filippo Chiarello, Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, Paola Rovelli

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Energia, dei Sistemi, del Territorio e delle Costruzioni, Università degli Studi di Pisa, Largo L. Lazzarino, Pisa, Italy

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy, Department of Management, Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Faculty of Economics and Management, Centre for Family Business Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

• Paola Belingheri, 
• Filippo Chiarello, 
• Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, 
• Paola Rovelli

• Published: September 21, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474
• Reader Comments

9 Nov 2021: The PLOS ONE Staff (2021) Correction: Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLOS ONE 16(11): e0259930. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259930 View correction

Gender equality is a major problem that places women at a disadvantage thereby stymieing economic growth and societal advancement. In the last two decades, extensive research has been conducted on gender related issues, studying both their antecedents and consequences. However, existing literature reviews fail to provide a comprehensive and clear picture of what has been studied so far, which could guide scholars in their future research. Our paper offers a scoping review of a large portion of the research that has been published over the last 22 years, on gender equality and related issues, with a specific focus on business and economics studies. Combining innovative methods drawn from both network analysis and text mining, we provide a synthesis of 15,465 scientific articles. We identify 27 main research topics, we measure their relevance from a semantic point of view and the relationships among them, highlighting the importance of each topic in the overall gender discourse. We find that prominent research topics mostly relate to women in the workforce–e.g., concerning compensation, role, education, decision-making and career progression. However, some of them are losing momentum, and some other research trends–for example related to female entrepreneurship, leadership and participation in the board of directors–are on the rise. Besides introducing a novel methodology to review broad literature streams, our paper offers a map of the main gender-research trends and presents the most popular and the emerging themes, as well as their intersections, outlining important avenues for future research.

Citation: Belingheri P, Chiarello F, Fronzetti Colladon A, Rovelli P (2021) Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLoS ONE 16(9): e0256474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474

Editor: Elisa Ughetto, Politecnico di Torino, ITALY

Received: June 25, 2021; Accepted: August 6, 2021; Published: September 21, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Belingheri et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files. The only exception is the text of the abstracts (over 15,000) that we have downloaded from Scopus. These abstracts can be retrieved from Scopus, but we do not have permission to redistribute them.

Funding: P.B and F.C.: Grant of the Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction of the University of Pisa (DESTEC) for the project “Measuring Gender Bias with Semantic Analysis: The Development of an Assessment Tool and its Application in the European Space Industry. P.B., F.C., A.F.C., P.R.: Grant of the Italian Association of Management Engineering (AiIG), “Misure di sostegno ai soci giovani AiIG” 2020, for the project “Gender Equality Through Data Intelligence (GEDI)”. F.C.: EU project ASSETs+ Project (Alliance for Strategic Skills addressing Emerging Technologies in Defence) EAC/A03/2018 - Erasmus+ programme, Sector Skills Alliances, Lot 3: Sector Skills Alliance for implementing a new strategic approach (Blueprint) to sectoral cooperation on skills G.A. NUMBER: 612678-EPP-1-2019-1-IT-EPPKA2-SSA-B.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The persistent gender inequalities that currently exist across the developed and developing world are receiving increasing attention from economists, policymakers, and the general public [e.g., 1 – 3 ]. Economic studies have indicated that women’s education and entry into the workforce contributes to social and economic well-being [e.g., 4 , 5 ], while their exclusion from the labor market and from managerial positions has an impact on overall labor productivity and income per capita [ 6 , 7 ]. The United Nations selected gender equality, with an emphasis on female education, as part of the Millennium Development Goals [ 8 ], and gender equality at-large as one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by 2030 [ 9 ]. These latter objectives involve not only developing nations, but rather all countries, to achieve economic, social and environmental well-being.

As is the case with many SDGs, gender equality is still far from being achieved and persists across education, access to opportunities, or presence in decision-making positions [ 7 , 10 , 11 ]. As we enter the last decade for the SDGs’ implementation, and while we are battling a global health pandemic, effective and efficient action becomes paramount to reach this ambitious goal.

Scholars have dedicated a massive effort towards understanding gender equality, its determinants, its consequences for women and society, and the appropriate actions and policies to advance women’s equality. Many topics have been covered, ranging from women’s education and human capital [ 12 , 13 ] and their role in society [e.g., 14 , 15 ], to their appointment in firms’ top ranked positions [e.g., 16 , 17 ] and performance implications [e.g., 18 , 19 ]. Despite some attempts, extant literature reviews provide a narrow view on these issues, restricted to specific topics–e.g., female students’ presence in STEM fields [ 20 ], educational gender inequality [ 5 ], the gender pay gap [ 21 ], the glass ceiling effect [ 22 ], leadership [ 23 ], entrepreneurship [ 24 ], women’s presence on the board of directors [ 25 , 26 ], diversity management [ 27 ], gender stereotypes in advertisement [ 28 ], or specific professions [ 29 ]. A comprehensive view on gender-related research, taking stock of key findings and under-studied topics is thus lacking.

Extant literature has also highlighted that gender issues, and their economic and social ramifications, are complex topics that involve a large number of possible antecedents and outcomes [ 7 ]. Indeed, gender equality actions are most effective when implemented in unison with other SDGs (e.g., with SDG 8, see [ 30 ]) in a synergetic perspective [ 10 ]. Many bodies of literature (e.g., business, economics, development studies, sociology and psychology) approach the problem of achieving gender equality from different perspectives–often addressing specific and narrow aspects. This sometimes leads to a lack of clarity about how different issues, circumstances, and solutions may be related in precipitating or mitigating gender inequality or its effects. As the number of papers grows at an increasing pace, this issue is exacerbated and there is a need to step back and survey the body of gender equality literature as a whole. There is also a need to examine synergies between different topics and approaches, as well as gaps in our understanding of how different problems and solutions work together. Considering the important topic of women’s economic and social empowerment, this paper aims to fill this gap by answering the following research question: what are the most relevant findings in the literature on gender equality and how do they relate to each other ?

To do so, we conduct a scoping review [ 31 ], providing a synthesis of 15,465 articles dealing with gender equity related issues published in the last twenty-two years, covering both the periods of the MDGs and the SDGs (i.e., 2000 to mid 2021) in all the journals indexed in the Academic Journal Guide’s 2018 ranking of business and economics journals. Given the huge amount of research conducted on the topic, we adopt an innovative methodology, which relies on social network analysis and text mining. These techniques are increasingly adopted when surveying large bodies of text. Recently, they were applied to perform analysis of online gender communication differences [ 32 ] and gender behaviors in online technology communities [ 33 ], to identify and classify sexual harassment instances in academia [ 34 ], and to evaluate the gender inclusivity of disaster management policies [ 35 ].

Applied to the title, abstracts and keywords of the articles in our sample, this methodology allows us to identify a set of 27 recurrent topics within which we automatically classify the papers. Introducing additional novelty, by means of the Semantic Brand Score (SBS) indicator [ 36 ] and the SBS BI app [ 37 ], we assess the importance of each topic in the overall gender equality discourse and its relationships with the other topics, as well as trends over time, with a more accurate description than that offered by traditional literature reviews relying solely on the number of papers presented in each topic.

This methodology, applied to gender equality research spanning the past twenty-two years, enables two key contributions. First, we extract the main message that each document is conveying and how this is connected to other themes in literature, providing a rich picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the emerging topics. Second, by examining the semantic relationship between topics and how tightly their discourses are linked, we can identify the key relationships and connections between different topics. This semi-automatic methodology is also highly reproducible with minimum effort.

This literature review is organized as follows. In the next section, we present how we selected relevant papers and how we analyzed them through text mining and social network analysis. We then illustrate the importance of 27 selected research topics, measured by means of the SBS indicator. In the results section, we present an overview of the literature based on the SBS results–followed by an in-depth narrative analysis of the top 10 topics (i.e., those with the highest SBS) and their connections. Subsequently, we highlight a series of under-studied connections between the topics where there is potential for future research. Through this analysis, we build a map of the main gender-research trends in the last twenty-two years–presenting the most popular themes. We conclude by highlighting key areas on which research should focused in the future.

Our aim is to map a broad topic, gender equality research, that has been approached through a host of different angles and through different disciplines. Scoping reviews are the most appropriate as they provide the freedom to map different themes and identify literature gaps, thereby guiding the recommendation of new research agendas [ 38 ].

Several practical approaches have been proposed to identify and assess the underlying topics of a specific field using big data [ 39 – 41 ], but many of them fail without proper paper retrieval and text preprocessing. This is specifically true for a research field such as the gender-related one, which comprises the work of scholars from different backgrounds. In this section, we illustrate a novel approach for the analysis of scientific (gender-related) papers that relies on methods and tools of social network analysis and text mining. Our procedure has four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) text preprocessing, (3) keywords extraction and classification, and (4) evaluation of semantic importance and image.

Data collection

In this study, we analyze 22 years of literature on gender-related research. Following established practice for scoping reviews [ 42 ], our data collection consisted of two main steps, which we summarize here below.

Firstly, we retrieved from the Scopus database all the articles written in English that contained the term “gender” in their title, abstract or keywords and were published in a journal listed in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) ( https://charteredabs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/AJG2018-Methodology.pdf ), considering the time period from Jan 2000 to May 2021. We used this information considering that abstracts, titles and keywords represent the most informative part of a paper, while using the full-text would increase the signal-to-noise ratio for information extraction. Indeed, these textual elements already demonstrated to be reliable sources of information for the task of domain lexicon extraction [ 43 , 44 ]. We chose Scopus as source of literature because of its popularity, its update rate, and because it offers an API to ease the querying process. Indeed, while it does not allow to retrieve the full text of scientific articles, the Scopus API offers access to titles, abstracts, citation information and metadata for all its indexed scholarly journals. Moreover, we decided to focus on the journals listed in the AJG 2018 ranking because we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies only. The AJG is indeed widely used by universities and business schools as a reference point for journal and research rigor and quality. This first step, executed in June 2021, returned more than 55,000 papers.

In the second step–because a look at the papers showed very sparse results, many of which were not in line with the topic of this literature review (e.g., papers dealing with health care or medical issues, where the word gender indicates the gender of the patients)–we applied further inclusion criteria to make the sample more focused on the topic of this literature review (i.e., women’s gender equality issues). Specifically, we only retained those papers mentioning, in their title and/or abstract, both gender-related keywords (e.g., daughter, female, mother) and keywords referring to bias and equality issues (e.g., equality, bias, diversity, inclusion). After text pre-processing (see next section), keywords were first identified from a frequency-weighted list of words found in the titles, abstracts and keywords in the initial list of papers, extracted through text mining (following the same approach as [ 43 ]). They were selected by two of the co-authors independently, following respectively a bottom up and a top-down approach. The bottom-up approach consisted of examining the words found in the frequency-weighted list and classifying those related to gender and equality. The top-down approach consisted in searching in the word list for notable gender and equality-related words. Table 1 reports the sets of keywords we considered, together with some examples of words that were used to search for their presence in the dataset (a full list is provided in the S1 Text ). At end of this second step, we obtained a final sample of 15,465 relevant papers.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t001

Text processing and keyword extraction

Text preprocessing aims at structuring text into a form that can be analyzed by statistical models. In the present section, we describe the preprocessing steps we applied to paper titles and abstracts, which, as explained below, partially follow a standard text preprocessing pipeline [ 45 ]. These activities have been performed using the R package udpipe [ 46 ].

The first step is n-gram extraction (i.e., a sequence of words from a given text sample) to identify which n-grams are important in the analysis, since domain-specific lexicons are often composed by bi-grams and tri-grams [ 47 ]. Multi-word extraction is usually implemented with statistics and linguistic rules, thus using the statistical properties of n-grams or machine learning approaches [ 48 ]. However, for the present paper, we used Scopus metadata in order to have a more effective and efficient n-grams collection approach [ 49 ]. We used the keywords of each paper in order to tag n-grams with their associated keywords automatically. Using this greedy approach, it was possible to collect all the keywords listed by the authors of the papers. From this list, we extracted only keywords composed by two, three and four words, we removed all the acronyms and rare keywords (i.e., appearing in less than 1% of papers), and we clustered keywords showing a high orthographic similarity–measured using a Levenshtein distance [ 50 ] lower than 2, considering these groups of keywords as representing same concepts, but expressed with different spelling. After tagging the n-grams in the abstracts, we followed a common data preparation pipeline that consists of the following steps: (i) tokenization, that splits the text into tokens (i.e., single words and previously tagged multi-words); (ii) removal of stop-words (i.e. those words that add little meaning to the text, usually being very common and short functional words–such as “and”, “or”, or “of”); (iii) parts-of-speech tagging, that is providing information concerning the morphological role of a word and its morphosyntactic context (e.g., if the token is a determiner, the next token is a noun or an adjective with very high confidence, [ 51 ]); and (iv) lemmatization, which consists in substituting each word with its dictionary form (or lemma). The output of the latter step allows grouping together the inflected forms of a word. For example, the verbs “am”, “are”, and “is” have the shared lemma “be”, or the nouns “cat” and “cats” both share the lemma “cat”. We preferred lemmatization over stemming [ 52 ] in order to obtain more interpretable results.

In addition, we identified a further set of keywords (with respect to those listed in the “keywords” field) by applying a series of automatic words unification and removal steps, as suggested in past research [ 53 , 54 ]. We removed: sparse terms (i.e., occurring in less than 0.1% of all documents), common terms (i.e., occurring in more than 10% of all documents) and retained only nouns and adjectives. It is relevant to notice that no document was lost due to these steps. We then used the TF-IDF function [ 55 ] to produce a new list of keywords. We additionally tested other approaches for the identification and clustering of keywords–such as TextRank [ 56 ] or Latent Dirichlet Allocation [ 57 ]–without obtaining more informative results.

Classification of research topics

To guide the literature analysis, two experts met regularly to examine the sample of collected papers and to identify the main topics and trends in gender research. Initially, they conducted brainstorming sessions on the topics they expected to find, due to their knowledge of the literature. This led to an initial list of topics. Subsequently, the experts worked independently, also supported by the keywords in paper titles and abstracts extracted with the procedure described above.

Considering all this information, each expert identified and clustered relevant keywords into topics. At the end of the process, the two assignments were compared and exhibited a 92% agreement. Another meeting was held to discuss discordant cases and reach a consensus. This resulted in a list of 27 topics, briefly introduced in Table 2 and subsequently detailed in the following sections.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t002

Evaluation of semantic importance

Working on the lemmatized corpus of the 15,465 papers included in our sample, we proceeded with the evaluation of semantic importance trends for each topic and with the analysis of their connections and prevalent textual associations. To this aim, we used the Semantic Brand Score indicator [ 36 ], calculated through the SBS BI webapp [ 37 ] that also produced a brand image report for each topic. For this study we relied on the computing resources of the ENEA/CRESCO infrastructure [ 58 ].

The Semantic Brand Score (SBS) is a measure of semantic importance that combines methods of social network analysis and text mining. It is usually applied for the analysis of (big) textual data to evaluate the importance of one or more brands, names, words, or sets of keywords [ 36 ]. Indeed, the concept of “brand” is intended in a flexible way and goes beyond products or commercial brands. In this study, we evaluate the SBS time-trends of the keywords defining the research topics discussed in the previous section. Semantic importance comprises the three dimensions of topic prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Prevalence measures how frequently a research topic is used in the discourse. The more a topic is mentioned by scientific articles, the more the research community will be aware of it, with possible increase of future studies; this construct is partly related to that of brand awareness [ 59 ]. This effect is even stronger, considering that we are analyzing the title, abstract and keywords of the papers, i.e. the parts that have the highest visibility. A very important characteristic of the SBS is that it considers the relationships among words in a text. Topic importance is not just a matter of how frequently a topic is mentioned, but also of the associations a topic has in the text. Specifically, texts are transformed into networks of co-occurring words, and relationships are studied through social network analysis [ 60 ]. This step is necessary to calculate the other two dimensions of our semantic importance indicator. Accordingly, a social network of words is generated for each time period considered in the analysis–i.e., a graph made of n nodes (words) and E edges weighted by co-occurrence frequency, with W being the set of edge weights. The keywords representing each topic were clustered into single nodes.

The construct of diversity relates to that of brand image [ 59 ], in the sense that it considers the richness and distinctiveness of textual (topic) associations. Considering the above-mentioned networks, we calculated diversity using the distinctiveness centrality metric–as in the formula presented by Fronzetti Colladon and Naldi [ 61 ].

Lastly, connectivity was measured as the weighted betweenness centrality [ 62 , 63 ] of each research topic node. We used the formula presented by Wasserman and Faust [ 60 ]. The dimension of connectivity represents the “brokerage power” of each research topic–i.e., how much it can serve as a bridge to connect other terms (and ultimately topics) in the discourse [ 36 ].

The SBS is the final composite indicator obtained by summing the standardized scores of prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Standardization was carried out considering all the words in the corpus, for each specific timeframe.

This methodology, applied to a large and heterogeneous body of text, enables to automatically identify two important sets of information that add value to the literature review. Firstly, the relevance of each topic in literature is measured through a composite indicator of semantic importance, rather than simply looking at word frequencies. This provides a much richer picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the topics that are emerging in the literature. Secondly, it enables to examine the extent of the semantic relationship between topics, looking at how tightly their discourses are linked. In a field such as gender equality, where many topics are closely linked to each other and present overlaps in issues and solutions, this methodology offers a novel perspective with respect to traditional literature reviews. In addition, it ensures reproducibility over time and the possibility to semi-automatically update the analysis, as new papers become available.

Overview of main topics

In terms of descriptive textual statistics, our corpus is made of 15,465 text documents, consisting of a total of 2,685,893 lemmatized tokens (words) and 32,279 types. As a result, the type-token ratio is 1.2%. The number of hapaxes is 12,141, with a hapax-token ratio of 37.61%.

Fig 1 shows the list of 27 topics by decreasing SBS. The most researched topic is compensation , exceeding all others in prevalence, diversity, and connectivity. This means it is not only mentioned more often than other topics, but it is also connected to a greater number of other topics and is central to the discourse on gender equality. The next four topics are, in order of SBS, role , education , decision-making , and career progression . These topics, except for education , all concern women in the workforce. Between these first five topics and the following ones there is a clear drop in SBS scores. In particular, the topics that follow have a lower connectivity than the first five. They are hiring , performance , behavior , organization , and human capital . Again, except for behavior and human capital , the other three topics are purely related to women in the workforce. After another drop-off, the following topics deal prevalently with women in society. This trend highlights that research on gender in business journals has so far mainly paid attention to the conditions that women experience in business contexts, while also devoting some attention to women in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g001

Fig 2 shows the SBS time series of the top 10 topics. While there has been a general increase in the number of Scopus-indexed publications in the last decade, we notice that some SBS trends remain steady, or even decrease. In particular, we observe that the main topic of the last twenty-two years, compensation , is losing momentum. Since 2016, it has been surpassed by decision-making , education and role , which may indicate that literature is increasingly attempting to identify root causes of compensation inequalities. Moreover, in the last two years, the topics of hiring , performance , and organization are experiencing the largest importance increase.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g002

Fig 3 shows the SBS time trends of the remaining 17 topics (i.e., those not in the top 10). As we can see from the graph, there are some that maintain a steady trend–such as reputation , management , networks and governance , which also seem to have little importance. More relevant topics with average stationary trends (except for the last two years) are culture , family , and parenting . The feminine topic is among the most important here, and one of those that exhibit the larger variations over time (similarly to leadership ). On the other hand, the are some topics that, even if not among the most important, show increasing SBS trends; therefore, they could be considered as emerging topics and could become popular in the near future. These are entrepreneurship , leadership , board of directors , and sustainability . These emerging topics are also interesting to anticipate future trends in gender equality research that are conducive to overall equality in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g003

In addition to the SBS score of the different topics, the network of terms they are associated to enables to gauge the extent to which their images (textual associations) overlap or differ ( Fig 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g004

There is a central cluster of topics with high similarity, which are all connected with women in the workforce. The cluster includes topics such as organization , decision-making , performance , hiring , human capital , education and compensation . In addition, the topic of well-being is found within this cluster, suggesting that women’s equality in the workforce is associated to well-being considerations. The emerging topics of entrepreneurship and leadership are also closely connected with each other, possibly implying that leadership is a much-researched quality in female entrepreneurship. Topics that are relatively more distant include personality , politics , feminine , empowerment , management , board of directors , reputation , governance , parenting , masculine and network .

The following sections describe the top 10 topics and their main associations in literature (see Table 3 ), while providing a brief overview of the emerging topics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t003

Compensation.

The topic of compensation is related to the topics of role , hiring , education and career progression , however, also sees a very high association with the words gap and inequality . Indeed, a well-known debate in degrowth economics centers around whether and how to adequately compensate women for their childbearing, childrearing, caregiver and household work [e.g., 30 ].

Even in paid work, women continue being offered lower compensations than their male counterparts who have the same job or cover the same role [ 64 – 67 ]. This severe inequality has been widely studied by scholars over the last twenty-two years. Dealing with this topic, some specific roles have been addressed. Specifically, research highlighted differences in compensation between female and male CEOs [e.g., 68 ], top executives [e.g., 69 ], and boards’ directors [e.g., 70 ]. Scholars investigated the determinants of these gaps, such as the gender composition of the board [e.g., 71 – 73 ] or women’s individual characteristics [e.g., 71 , 74 ].

Among these individual characteristics, education plays a relevant role [ 75 ]. Education is indeed presented as the solution for women, not only to achieve top executive roles, but also to reduce wage inequality [e.g., 76 , 77 ]. Past research has highlighted education influences on gender wage gaps, specifically referring to gender differences in skills [e.g., 78 ], college majors [e.g., 79 ], and college selectivity [e.g., 80 ].

Finally, the wage gap issue is strictly interrelated with hiring –e.g., looking at whether being a mother affects hiring and compensation [e.g., 65 , 81 ] or relating compensation to unemployment [e.g., 82 ]–and career progression –for instance looking at meritocracy [ 83 , 84 ] or the characteristics of the boss for whom women work [e.g., 85 ].

The roles covered by women have been deeply investigated. Scholars have focused on the role of women in their families and the society as a whole [e.g., 14 , 15 ], and, more widely, in business contexts [e.g., 18 , 81 ]. Indeed, despite still lagging behind their male counterparts [e.g., 86 , 87 ], in the last decade there has been an increase in top ranked positions achieved by women [e.g., 88 , 89 ]. Following this phenomenon, scholars have posed greater attention towards the presence of women in the board of directors [e.g., 16 , 18 , 90 , 91 ], given the increasing pressure to appoint female directors that firms, especially listed ones, have experienced. Other scholars have focused on the presence of women covering the role of CEO [e.g., 17 , 92 ] or being part of the top management team [e.g., 93 ]. Irrespectively of the level of analysis, all these studies tried to uncover the antecedents of women’s presence among top managers [e.g., 92 , 94 ] and the consequences of having a them involved in the firm’s decision-making –e.g., on performance [e.g., 19 , 95 , 96 ], risk [e.g., 97 , 98 ], and corporate social responsibility [e.g., 99 , 100 ].

Besides studying the difficulties and discriminations faced by women in getting a job [ 81 , 101 ], and, more specifically in the hiring , appointment, or career progression to these apical roles [e.g., 70 , 83 ], the majority of research of women’s roles dealt with compensation issues. Specifically, scholars highlight the pay-gap that still exists between women and men, both in general [e.g., 64 , 65 ], as well as referring to boards’ directors [e.g., 70 , 102 ], CEOs and executives [e.g., 69 , 103 , 104 ].

Finally, other scholars focused on the behavior of women when dealing with business. In this sense, particular attention has been paid to leadership and entrepreneurial behaviors. The former quite overlaps with dealing with the roles mentioned above, but also includes aspects such as leaders being stereotyped as masculine [e.g., 105 ], the need for greater exposure to female leaders to reduce biases [e.g., 106 ], or female leaders acting as queen bees [e.g., 107 ]. Regarding entrepreneurship , scholars mainly investigated women’s entrepreneurial entry [e.g., 108 , 109 ], differences between female and male entrepreneurs in the evaluations and funding received from investors [e.g., 110 , 111 ], and their performance gap [e.g., 112 , 113 ].

Education has long been recognized as key to social advancement and economic stability [ 114 ], for job progression and also a barrier to gender equality, especially in STEM-related fields. Research on education and gender equality is mostly linked with the topics of compensation , human capital , career progression , hiring , parenting and decision-making .

Education contributes to a higher human capital [ 115 ] and constitutes an investment on the part of women towards their future. In this context, literature points to the gender gap in educational attainment, and the consequences for women from a social, economic, personal and professional standpoint. Women are found to have less access to formal education and information, especially in emerging countries, which in turn may cause them to lose social and economic opportunities [e.g., 12 , 116 – 119 ]. Education in local and rural communities is also paramount to communicate the benefits of female empowerment , contributing to overall societal well-being [e.g., 120 ].

Once women access education, the image they have of the world and their place in society (i.e., habitus) affects their education performance [ 13 ] and is passed on to their children. These situations reinforce gender stereotypes, which become self-fulfilling prophecies that may negatively affect female students’ performance by lowering their confidence and heightening their anxiety [ 121 , 122 ]. Besides formal education, also the information that women are exposed to on a daily basis contributes to their human capital . Digital inequalities, for instance, stems from men spending more time online and acquiring higher digital skills than women [ 123 ].

Education is also a factor that should boost employability of candidates and thus hiring , career progression and compensation , however the relationship between these factors is not straightforward [ 115 ]. First, educational choices ( decision-making ) are influenced by variables such as self-efficacy and the presence of barriers, irrespectively of the career opportunities they offer, especially in STEM [ 124 ]. This brings additional difficulties to women’s enrollment and persistence in scientific and technical fields of study due to stereotypes and biases [ 125 , 126 ]. Moreover, access to education does not automatically translate into job opportunities for women and minority groups [ 127 , 128 ] or into female access to managerial positions [ 129 ].

Finally, parenting is reported as an antecedent of education [e.g., 130 ], with much of the literature focusing on the role of parents’ education on the opportunities afforded to children to enroll in education [ 131 – 134 ] and the role of parenting in their offspring’s perception of study fields and attitudes towards learning [ 135 – 138 ]. Parental education is also a predictor of the other related topics, namely human capital and compensation [ 139 ].

Decision-making.

This literature mainly points to the fact that women are thought to make decisions differently than men. Women have indeed different priorities, such as they care more about people’s well-being, working with people or helping others, rather than maximizing their personal (or their firm’s) gain [ 140 ]. In other words, women typically present more communal than agentic behaviors, which are instead more frequent among men [ 141 ]. These different attitude, behavior and preferences in turn affect the decisions they make [e.g., 142 ] and the decision-making of the firm in which they work [e.g., 143 ].

At the individual level, gender affects, for instance, career aspirations [e.g., 144 ] and choices [e.g., 142 , 145 ], or the decision of creating a venture [e.g., 108 , 109 , 146 ]. Moreover, in everyday life, women and men make different decisions regarding partners [e.g., 147 ], childcare [e.g., 148 ], education [e.g., 149 ], attention to the environment [e.g., 150 ] and politics [e.g., 151 ].

At the firm level, scholars highlighted, for example, how the presence of women in the board affects corporate decisions [e.g., 152 , 153 ], that female CEOs are more conservative in accounting decisions [e.g., 154 ], or that female CFOs tend to make more conservative decisions regarding the firm’s financial reporting [e.g., 155 ]. Nevertheless, firm level research also investigated decisions that, influenced by gender bias, affect women, such as those pertaining hiring [e.g., 156 , 157 ], compensation [e.g., 73 , 158 ], or the empowerment of women once appointed [ 159 ].

Career progression.

Once women have entered the workforce, the key aspect to achieve gender equality becomes career progression , including efforts toward overcoming the glass ceiling. Indeed, according to the SBS analysis, career progression is highly related to words such as work, social issues and equality. The topic with which it has the highest semantic overlap is role , followed by decision-making , hiring , education , compensation , leadership , human capital , and family .

Career progression implies an advancement in the hierarchical ladder of the firm, assigning managerial roles to women. Coherently, much of the literature has focused on identifying rationales for a greater female participation in the top management team and board of directors [e.g., 95 ] as well as the best criteria to ensure that the decision-makers promote the most valuable employees irrespectively of their individual characteristics, such as gender [e.g., 84 ]. The link between career progression , role and compensation is often provided in practice by performance appraisal exercises, frequently rooted in a culture of meritocracy that guides bonuses, salary increases and promotions. However, performance appraisals can actually mask gender-biased decisions where women are held to higher standards than their male colleagues [e.g., 83 , 84 , 95 , 160 , 161 ]. Women often have less opportunities to gain leadership experience and are less visible than their male colleagues, which constitute barriers to career advancement [e.g., 162 ]. Therefore, transparency and accountability, together with procedures that discourage discretionary choices, are paramount to achieve a fair career progression [e.g., 84 ], together with the relaxation of strict job boundaries in favor of cross-functional and self-directed tasks [e.g., 163 ].

In addition, a series of stereotypes about the type of leadership characteristics that are required for top management positions, which fit better with typical male and agentic attributes, are another key barrier to career advancement for women [e.g., 92 , 160 ].

Hiring is the entrance gateway for women into the workforce. Therefore, it is related to other workforce topics such as compensation , role , career progression , decision-making , human capital , performance , organization and education .

A first stream of literature focuses on the process leading up to candidates’ job applications, demonstrating that bias exists before positions are even opened, and it is perpetuated both by men and women through networking and gatekeeping practices [e.g., 164 , 165 ].

The hiring process itself is also subject to biases [ 166 ], for example gender-congruity bias that leads to men being preferred candidates in male-dominated sectors [e.g., 167 ], women being hired in positions with higher risk of failure [e.g., 168 ] and limited transparency and accountability afforded by written processes and procedures [e.g., 164 ] that all contribute to ascriptive inequality. In addition, providing incentives for evaluators to hire women may actually work to this end; however, this is not the case when supporting female candidates endangers higher-ranking male ones [ 169 ].

Another interesting perspective, instead, looks at top management teams’ composition and the effects on hiring practices, indicating that firms with more women in top management are less likely to lay off staff [e.g., 152 ].

Performance.

Several scholars posed their attention towards women’s performance, its consequences [e.g., 170 , 171 ] and the implications of having women in decision-making positions [e.g., 18 , 19 ].

At the individual level, research focused on differences in educational and academic performance between women and men, especially referring to the gender gap in STEM fields [e.g., 171 ]. The presence of stereotype threats–that is the expectation that the members of a social group (e.g., women) “must deal with the possibility of being judged or treated stereotypically, or of doing something that would confirm the stereotype” [ 172 ]–affects women’s interested in STEM [e.g., 173 ], as well as their cognitive ability tests, penalizing them [e.g., 174 ]. A stronger gender identification enhances this gap [e.g., 175 ], whereas mentoring and role models can be used as solutions to this problem [e.g., 121 ]. Despite the negative effect of stereotype threats on girls’ performance [ 176 ], female and male students perform equally in mathematics and related subjects [e.g., 177 ]. Moreover, while individuals’ performance at school and university generally affects their achievements and the field in which they end up working, evidence reveals that performance in math or other scientific subjects does not explain why fewer women enter STEM working fields; rather this gap depends on other aspects, such as culture, past working experiences, or self-efficacy [e.g., 170 ]. Finally, scholars have highlighted the penalization that women face for their positive performance, for instance when they succeed in traditionally male areas [e.g., 178 ]. This penalization is explained by the violation of gender-stereotypic prescriptions [e.g., 179 , 180 ], that is having women well performing in agentic areas, which are typical associated to men. Performance penalization can thus be overcome by clearly conveying communal characteristics and behaviors [ 178 ].

Evidence has been provided on how the involvement of women in boards of directors and decision-making positions affects firms’ performance. Nevertheless, results are mixed, with some studies showing positive effects on financial [ 19 , 181 , 182 ] and corporate social performance [ 99 , 182 , 183 ]. Other studies maintain a negative association [e.g., 18 ], and other again mixed [e.g., 184 ] or non-significant association [e.g., 185 ]. Also with respect to the presence of a female CEO, mixed results emerged so far, with some researches demonstrating a positive effect on firm’s performance [e.g., 96 , 186 ], while other obtaining only a limited evidence of this relationship [e.g., 103 ] or a negative one [e.g., 187 ].

Finally, some studies have investigated whether and how women’s performance affects their hiring [e.g., 101 ] and career progression [e.g., 83 , 160 ]. For instance, academic performance leads to different returns in hiring for women and men. Specifically, high-achieving men are called back significantly more often than high-achieving women, which are penalized when they have a major in mathematics; this result depends on employers’ gendered standards for applicants [e.g., 101 ]. Once appointed, performance ratings are more strongly related to promotions for women than men, and promoted women typically show higher past performance ratings than those of promoted men. This suggesting that women are subject to stricter standards for promotion [e.g., 160 ].

Behavioral aspects related to gender follow two main streams of literature. The first examines female personality and behavior in the workplace, and their alignment with cultural expectations or stereotypes [e.g., 188 ] as well as their impacts on equality. There is a common bias that depicts women as less agentic than males. Certain characteristics, such as those more congruent with male behaviors–e.g., self-promotion [e.g., 189 ], negotiation skills [e.g., 190 ] and general agentic behavior [e.g., 191 ]–, are less accepted in women. However, characteristics such as individualism in women have been found to promote greater gender equality in society [ 192 ]. In addition, behaviors such as display of emotions [e.g., 193 ], which are stereotypically female, work against women’s acceptance in the workplace, requiring women to carefully moderate their behavior to avoid exclusion. A counter-intuitive result is that women and minorities, which are more marginalized in the workplace, tend to be better problem-solvers in innovation competitions due to their different knowledge bases [ 194 ].

The other side of the coin is examined in a parallel literature stream on behavior towards women in the workplace. As a result of biases, prejudices and stereotypes, women may experience adverse behavior from their colleagues, such as incivility and harassment, which undermine their well-being [e.g., 195 , 196 ]. Biases that go beyond gender, such as for overweight people, are also more strongly applied to women [ 197 ].

Organization.

The role of women and gender bias in organizations has been studied from different perspectives, which mirror those presented in detail in the following sections. Specifically, most research highlighted the stereotypical view of leaders [e.g., 105 ] and the roles played by women within firms, for instance referring to presence in the board of directors [e.g., 18 , 90 , 91 ], appointment as CEOs [e.g., 16 ], or top executives [e.g., 93 ].

Scholars have investigated antecedents and consequences of the presence of women in these apical roles. On the one side they looked at hiring and career progression [e.g., 83 , 92 , 160 , 168 , 198 ], finding women typically disadvantaged with respect to their male counterparts. On the other side, they studied women’s leadership styles and influence on the firm’s decision-making [e.g., 152 , 154 , 155 , 199 ], with implications for performance [e.g., 18 , 19 , 96 ].

Human capital.

Human capital is a transverse topic that touches upon many different aspects of female gender equality. As such, it has the most associations with other topics, starting with education as mentioned above, with career-related topics such as role , decision-making , hiring , career progression , performance , compensation , leadership and organization . Another topic with which there is a close connection is behavior . In general, human capital is approached both from the education standpoint but also from the perspective of social capital.

The behavioral aspect in human capital comprises research related to gender differences for example in cultural and religious beliefs that influence women’s attitudes and perceptions towards STEM subjects [ 142 , 200 – 202 ], towards employment [ 203 ] or towards environmental issues [ 150 , 204 ]. These cultural differences also emerge in the context of globalization which may accelerate gender equality in the workforce [ 205 , 206 ]. Gender differences also appear in behaviors such as motivation [ 207 ], and in negotiation [ 190 ], and have repercussions on women’s decision-making related to their careers. The so-called gender equality paradox sees women in countries with lower gender equality more likely to pursue studies and careers in STEM fields, whereas the gap in STEM enrollment widens as countries achieve greater equality in society [ 171 ].

Career progression is modeled by literature as a choice-process where personal preferences, culture and decision-making affect the chosen path and the outcomes. Some literature highlights how women tend to self-select into different professions than men, often due to stereotypes rather than actual ability to perform in these professions [ 142 , 144 ]. These stereotypes also affect the perceptions of female performance or the amount of human capital required to equal male performance [ 110 , 193 , 208 ], particularly for mothers [ 81 ]. It is therefore often assumed that women are better suited to less visible and less leadership -oriented roles [ 209 ]. Women also express differing preferences towards work-family balance, which affect whether and how they pursue human capital gains [ 210 ], and ultimately their career progression and salary .

On the other hand, men are often unaware of gendered processes and behaviors that they carry forward in their interactions and decision-making [ 211 , 212 ]. Therefore, initiatives aimed at increasing managers’ human capital –by raising awareness of gender disparities in their organizations and engaging them in diversity promotion–are essential steps to counter gender bias and segregation [ 213 ].

Emerging topics: Leadership and entrepreneurship

Among the emerging topics, the most pervasive one is women reaching leadership positions in the workforce and in society. This is still a rare occurrence for two main types of factors, on the one hand, bias and discrimination make it harder for women to access leadership positions [e.g., 214 – 216 ], on the other hand, the competitive nature and high pressure associated with leadership positions, coupled with the lack of women currently represented, reduce women’s desire to achieve them [e.g., 209 , 217 ]. Women are more effective leaders when they have access to education, resources and a diverse environment with representation [e.g., 218 , 219 ].

One sector where there is potential for women to carve out a leadership role is entrepreneurship . Although at the start of the millennium the discourse on entrepreneurship was found to be “discriminatory, gender-biased, ethnocentrically determined and ideologically controlled” [ 220 ], an increasing body of literature is studying how to stimulate female entrepreneurship as an alternative pathway to wealth, leadership and empowerment [e.g., 221 ]. Many barriers exist for women to access entrepreneurship, including the institutional and legal environment, social and cultural factors, access to knowledge and resources, and individual behavior [e.g., 222 , 223 ]. Education has been found to raise women’s entrepreneurial intentions [e.g., 224 ], although this effect is smaller than for men [e.g., 109 ]. In addition, increasing self-efficacy and risk-taking behavior constitute important success factors [e.g., 225 ].

Finally, the topic of sustainability is worth mentioning, as it is the primary objective of the SDGs and is closely associated with societal well-being. As society grapples with the effects of climate change and increasing depletion of natural resources, a narrative has emerged on women and their greater link to the environment [ 226 ]. Studies in developed countries have found some support for women leaders’ attention to sustainability issues in firms [e.g., 227 – 229 ], and smaller resource consumption by women [ 230 ]. At the same time, women will likely be more affected by the consequences of climate change [e.g., 230 ] but often lack the decision-making power to influence local decision-making on resource management and environmental policies [e.g., 231 ].

Research gaps and conclusions

Research on gender equality has advanced rapidly in the past decades, with a steady increase in publications, both in mainstream topics related to women in education and the workforce, and in emerging topics. Through a novel approach combining methods of text mining and social network analysis, we examined a comprehensive body of literature comprising 15,465 papers published between 2000 and mid 2021 on topics related to gender equality. We identified a set of 27 topics addressed by the literature and examined their connections.

At the highest level of abstraction, it is worth noting that papers abound on the identification of issues related to gender inequalities and imbalances in the workforce and in society. Literature has thoroughly examined the (unconscious) biases, barriers, stereotypes, and discriminatory behaviors that women are facing as a result of their gender. Instead, there are much fewer papers that discuss or demonstrate effective solutions to overcome gender bias [e.g., 121 , 143 , 145 , 163 , 194 , 213 , 232 ]. This is partly due to the relative ease in studying the status quo, as opposed to studying changes in the status quo. However, we observed a shift in the more recent years towards solution seeking in this domain, which we strongly encourage future researchers to focus on. In the future, we may focus on collecting and mapping pro-active contributions to gender studies, using additional Natural Language Processing techniques, able to measure the sentiment of scientific papers [ 43 ].

All of the mainstream topics identified in our literature review are closely related, and there is a wealth of insights looking at the intersection between issues such as education and career progression or human capital and role . However, emerging topics are worthy of being furtherly explored. It would be interesting to see more work on the topic of female entrepreneurship , exploring aspects such as education , personality , governance , management and leadership . For instance, how can education support female entrepreneurship? How can self-efficacy and risk-taking behaviors be taught or enhanced? What are the differences in managerial and governance styles of female entrepreneurs? Which personality traits are associated with successful entrepreneurs? Which traits are preferred by venture capitalists and funding bodies?

The emerging topic of sustainability also deserves further attention, as our society struggles with climate change and its consequences. It would be interesting to see more research on the intersection between sustainability and entrepreneurship , looking at how female entrepreneurs are tackling sustainability issues, examining both their business models and their company governance . In addition, scholars are suggested to dig deeper into the relationship between family values and behaviors.

Moreover, it would be relevant to understand how women’s networks (social capital), or the composition and structure of social networks involving both women and men, enable them to increase their remuneration and reach top corporate positions, participate in key decision-making bodies, and have a voice in communities. Furthermore, the achievement of gender equality might significantly change firm networks and ecosystems, with important implications for their performance and survival.

Similarly, research at the nexus of (corporate) governance , career progression , compensation and female empowerment could yield useful insights–for example discussing how enterprises, institutions and countries are managed and the impact for women and other minorities. Are there specific governance structures that favor diversity and inclusion?

Lastly, we foresee an emerging stream of research pertaining how the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged women, especially in the workforce, by making gender biases more evident.

For our analysis, we considered a set of 15,465 articles downloaded from the Scopus database (which is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature). As we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies, we only considered those papers published in journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide (AJG) 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). All the journals listed in this ranking are also indexed by Scopus. Therefore, looking at a single database (i.e., Scopus) should not be considered a limitation of our study. However, future research could consider different databases and inclusion criteria.

With our literature review, we offer researchers a comprehensive map of major gender-related research trends over the past twenty-two years. This can serve as a lens to look to the future, contributing to the achievement of SDG5. Researchers may use our study as a starting point to identify key themes addressed in the literature. In addition, our methodological approach–based on the use of the Semantic Brand Score and its webapp–could support scholars interested in reviewing other areas of research.

Supporting information

S1 text. keywords used for paper selection..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.s001

Acknowledgments

The computing resources and the related technical support used for this work have been provided by CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure and its staff. CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure is funded by ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development and by Italian and European research programmes (see http://www.cresco.enea.it/english for information).

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 9. UN. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembley 70 Session; 2015.
• 11. Nature. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature. 2020;577(January 2):7–8
• 37. Fronzetti Colladon A, Grippa F. Brand intelligence analytics. In: Przegalinska A, Grippa F, Gloor PA, editors. Digital Transformation of Collaboration. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2020. p. 125–41. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233276 pmid:32442196
• 39. Griffiths TL, Steyvers M, editors. Finding scientific topics. National academy of Sciences; 2004.
• 40. Mimno D, Wallach H, Talley E, Leenders M, McCallum A, editors. Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models. 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2011.
• 41. Wang C, Blei DM, editors. Collaborative topic modeling for recommending scientific articles. 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining 2011.
• 46. Straka M, Straková J, editors. Tokenizing, pos tagging, lemmatizing and parsing ud 2.0 with udpipe. CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies; 2017.
• 49. Lu Y, Li, R., Wen K, Lu Z, editors. Automatic keyword extraction for scientific literatures using references. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Innovative Design and Manufacturing (ICIDM); 2014.
• 55. Roelleke T, Wang J, editors. TF-IDF uncovered. 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval—SIGIR ‘08; 2008.
• 56. Mihalcea R, Tarau P, editors. TextRank: Bringing order into text. 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2004.
• 58. Iannone F, Ambrosino F, Bracco G, De Rosa M, Funel A, Guarnieri G, et al., editors. CRESCO ENEA HPC clusters: A working example of a multifabric GPFS Spectrum Scale layout. 2019 International Conference on High Performance Computing & Simulation (HPCS); 2019.
• 60. Wasserman S, Faust K. Social network analysis: Methods and applications: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
• 141. Williams JE, Best DL. Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study, Rev: Sage Publications, Inc; 1990.
• 172. Steele CM, Aronson J. Stereotype threat and the test performance of academically successful African Americans. In: Jencks C, Phillips M, editors. The Black–White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings; 1998. p. 401–27

Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Mental Health and Humanities Education (ICMHHE 2021）

The Literature Review of Gender Discriminations in Schools, Families, and Workplaces

This paper investigates gender discriminations in schools, families and workplaces. The main conclusion can be drawn is that female is received discrimination to some extent, which is a serious problem. The aim of this research is to review the recent progress of gender discriminations and remind people that the existence of gender bias will influence female’s rights and interests, and then lead to social injustice. In the family, the conventional concept is that females are less capable than males. Hence, males play a more important roles in the family issues that will have a disadvantageous impact on females. To solve this issue, female need to learn to defend their equities through legal means and related committees. In addition, the findings about gender discriminations in the workplace are mainly due to females’ special physiological processes, such as the inconvenience brought to the company by giving birth to children. It also makes companies more likely to choose male employees. In school, boys get more attentions and education from teachers, so that girls receive an inequitable education at school. The purpose of this review paper is to raise people’s awareness of the importance of correcting gender discrimination. If there is a law which can restrain gender discrimination, then the atmosphere of gender discriminations will be weaker and weaker until it disappears. It makes a lot of sense to help females recognize the existence of gender discriminations and learn how to solve it.

Download article (PDF)

Cite this article

Advertisement

Promoting Gender Equality: A Systematic Review of Interventions

• Open access
• Published: 01 September 2022
• Volume 35 , pages 318–343, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Michaela Guthridge   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5157-9839 1 , 3 ,
• Maggie Kirkman 2 ,
• Tania Penovic 4 , 5 &
• Melita J. Giummarra 1 , 5  

29k Accesses

20 Citations

14 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

More than four decades have passed since the United Nation’s Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) was adopted. Now is an opportune time to consider whether the interventions seeking to realise CEDAW’s aspirations have brought us closer to achieving gender equality. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesise evidence for the effectiveness of social justice, cognitive, or behaviour-change interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women or girls. Interventions could be implemented in any context, with any mode of delivery and duration, if they measured gender equity or discrimination outcomes, and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Papers on violence against women and sexuality were not eligible. Seventy-eight papers reporting qualitative (n = 36), quantitative (n = 23), and multi-methods (n = 19) research projects met the eligibility criteria after screening 7,832 citations identified from psycINFO, ProQuest, Scopus searches, reference lists and expert recommendations. Findings were synthesised narratively. Improved gender inclusion was the most frequently reported change (n = 39), particularly for education and media interventions. Fifty percent of interventions measuring social change in gender equality did not achieve beneficial effects. Most gender mainstreaming interventions had only partial beneficial effects on outcomes, calling into question their efficacy in practice. Twenty-eight interventions used education and awareness-raising strategies, which also predominantly had only partial beneficial effects. Overall research quality was low to moderate, and the key findings created doubt that interventions to date have achieved meaningful change. Interventions may not have achieved macrolevel change because they did not explicitly address meso and micro change. We conclude with a summary of the evidence for key determinants of the promotion of gender equality, including a call to address men’s emotional responses (micro) in the process of achieving gender equality (micro/meso/macrolevels).

Similar content being viewed by others

Operationalising masculinities in theories and practices of gender-transformative health interventions: a scoping review

Interventions to reduce adverse health outcomes resulting from manifestations of gender bias amongst immigrant populations: a scoping review

Beyond gender mainstreaming: transforming humanitarian action, organizations and culture

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The adoption of CEDAW was a remarkable achievement in the history of the women’s movement. Its ultimate aim was to catalyse social transformation that transcends cursory legislative reform (Facio & Morgan, 2009 ). Article 3 of CEDAW promotes this social transformation, calling for state parties to ‘take all appropriate measures’ to achieve gender equality. In practice this has included, but has not been limited to, gender-blind strategies, awareness raising, litigation, international advocacy, art and social media activism, and gender mainstreaming (see Table 1 for definition).

The Global Gender Gap Index 2022 benchmarks 146 countries on the evolution of gender-based gaps in economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment (World Economic Forum, 2022 ). Although the Index measures gender parity (defined in Table 1 ) rather than substantive equality, it is a useful tool for analysing progression and regression. With scores depicting the distance to parity on a scale of zero to one hundred, the 2022 Report found the average distance completed to parity was 68 per cent. With the present trajectory, it will take 132 years to close the gender gap and 151 years to achieve equal economic participation and opportunity (World Economic Forum, 2022 ). Moreover, these estimates are predicted to worsen as the world faces crises in politics, economics, health, food, and the environment. Now more than ever we must assess our successes and failures in attempting to reduce gender inequality and discrimination.

The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesise evidence of the effectiveness of social justice interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women and girls. Because recent systematic reviews have examined the effectiveness of interventions targeting violence against women and sexuality (e.g. Karakurt et al., 2019 ; Bourey et al., 2015 ; Yakubovich et al., 2018 ) we did not include these types of interventions. We were unable, however, to identify systematic reviews examining other interventions targeting gender equality. Therefore, this review focused on interventions that sought to achieve gender equality in any political, social, cultural or economic context, except violence against women and sexuality.

Theoretical Framework

The truism ‘context matters’ is pertinent to this systematic review. According to contextual social psychology, effects brought about at a microlevel are modified by the mesolevel and macrolevel, and vice versa (Pettigrew, 2021 ). In this review, microlevel variables include individual characteristics, including biology, beliefs, behaviours, values, and emotions, such as empathy and resentment. Mesolevel contextual factors include interpersonal interactions in family, work, and school etc. (e.g. gender segregation), and macrolevel context includes broader social and cultural norms, including religion and politics. Social norms in this context are “rules of action shared by people in a given society or group; they define what is considered normal and acceptable behaviour for the members of that group” (Cislaghi & Heise, 2020 , p. 409). In this sense, social norms exist within the mind, while gender norms exist outside it, and both are produced and reproduced through social interaction. In contextual social psychology, beliefs are embedded in institutions that affect our relational behaviours. While there are psychological causes of macrophenomena (Pettigrew, 2021 ), these phenomena (such as patriarchy) also influence individual affect. For example, affirmative action laws (macro) should increase contact between genders (meso), which in turn should reduce individual prejudice (micro). While this is a top down example, it also works from the bottom up, whereby micro behaviours can affect macrophenomena. In this context, prejudice against women and girls is a “multilevel syndrome” (Pettigrew, 2021 , p. 74).

“Systems thinking” also recognises the intersection between problems and processes from local to global levels (Arnold & Wade, 2015 ). Systems thinking is a complex interplay of a multitude of constantly evolving factors (Banerjee & Lowalekar, 2021 ). According to systems thinking, gender equality will be realised when interventions at the micro, meso and macrolevel are configured holistically, rather than individualistically. Interventions at any level need to consider and accommodate the role of processes and factors that may support or hinder the effectiveness of the intervention to yield population benefits. The different contextual levels that impact on gender inequality may be successfully tackled by feminist movements, but integrating the interventions pluralistically rather than monistically remains elusive as feminist movements appear to continue to work in silos. In undertaking strategies across different contexts, however, we are more likely to achieve substantive equality. But we need to address this complexity in the three contextual levels (micro, meso, macro) in order to predict, modify and eliminate discrimination against women and girls. These theoretical frameworks are used throughout this review to aid the synthesis of the evidence and identification of implications for practice.

Review Design

The Sample, Phenomena of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type (SPIDER) tool was used to design the review (Cooke et al., 2012 ). SPIDER is appropriate for systematic reviews of quantitative, qualitative, and multi-methods research. We use the term multi method rather than mixed method because mixed method studies could be considered to have used multiple methods of data collection/analysis, but not all multi-methods studies follow “mixed methods” procedures as they do not always provide an integrated synthesis of findings across the methods used (Creswell, 2009 ). The search terms are documented in Supplementary Tables 1 and 2. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al., 2021 ). Rapid review methods were used for citation screening and data extraction (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ). Papers were eligible according to the criteria defined below.

The sample could include people of any age, race, or gender in local, global, or transboundary intervention contexts. The phenomena of interest included any social justice, cognitive or behaviour-change interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women, with any mode of delivery and duration. Interventions could be any type of program (e.g. behaviour change), policy (e.g. gender mainstreaming), process (e.g. awareness raising) or experimental condition that aimed to influence gender-focused outcomes. An intervention was categorised as achieving its aim (e.g., having a beneficial effect on gender equality or reducing discrimination), partially achieving its aim, not achieving its aim according to the assessment in the paper (i.e. if the analyses in the respective paper found that the intervention did not work), or having a harmful effect (i.e. resulting in increased discrimination or inequality).

The intervention being investigated could have been administered by any party, including expert advocates, government or non-government organisations (NGOs), social justice enterprises, or academic researchers. The research design did not need to include a comparator or control group, but must have incorporated a between-groups or pre-post comparison, or retrospective assessment of the impact, feasibility or acceptability of the intervention or program. The primary outcome for evaluation was any measure of actual or perceived level of, or change in, gender (in)equality, gender bias, or discrimination against women or girls. Secondary outcomes were the perceived level of inclusion, solidarity, awareness, empowerment, or equity. The research methods could include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed- or multi-methods. Eligible papers were published in peer-reviewed journals in English from 1990 to 2022. Whilst CEDAW was adopted in 1979, this timeframe was selected to ensure contemporaneity. A protocol for the review was developed a priori, but not registered.

Search Strategy and Eligibility Screening

As this was a review of research across multiple disciplines, three databases were used: Scopus, ProQuest, and psycINFO, in addition to reviewing reference lists and recommendations by experts. Search terms were adapted to each database. After screening the first search results it was evident that the terms were not broad enough, so a second search including additional terms was undertaken (see Supplementary Tables 1 and 2 for terms of both search strategies). All search results were uploaded to Covidence for eligibility screening and duplicate removal by reviewer one. Using Abstrackr, a second author screened a minimum of 10 percent of citations, consistent with rapid review methods (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ), or until < 50 percent of citations were predicted to be relevant. Abstrackr is a machine-learning program that generates predictions of the likely relevance of records based on judgements made by the reviewer (Wallace et al., 2012 ), which has been found to have excellent sensitivity and to generate significant workload savings (Giummarra et al., 2020 ). After titles and abstracts were screened, full text articles were assessed against the eligibility criteria, noting reasons for exclusion. Both reviewers met to discuss any conflicts; if consensus could not be reached a third author was consulted. The authors included experts in gender equality who provided significant input into the search strategy, identification of relevant literature, and synthesis.

Quality Assessment

The quality of research was assessed by the first author using a standard method (Kmet et al., 2004 ) with the added criterion of whether papers reported approval by a formally constituted human research ethics committee. Supplementary Tables 3–5 specify the quality criteria. Overall quality was classified as poor (studies meeting < 0.50 criteria), adequate (0.50–0.69), good (0.70–0.80), or strong (> 0.80) consistent with previous studies (Parsons et al., 2017 ).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted in three categories: The authors and publication year of the paper ; research aims, theoretical approach, methods, sample size, eligibility criteria, and sample characteristics; and, the intervention , aim, type, sector, geographic region, description, duration, targeted outcomes, effects, and short- and long-term impacts. Figures to summarise the proportion of studies from different geographic regions were generated using www.sankeymatic.com/build/ . Ten percent of the full-text articles were randomly selected, stratified by research method, for independent data extraction by a second author, consistent with rapid review methods (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ). The data extracted from both reviewers was cross-checked for accuracy and completeness. Sources of heterogeneity were noted, particularly variation in study samples, settings, contexts and intervention designs or aims. Given the heterogeneity of the interventions and the research, meta-analysis and meta-synthesis were not appropriate. Therefore, the findings were thematically synthesised according to intervention sector (e.g. education, employment etc.) and context (i.e., micro, meso and macro levels).

A total of 7,832 records were screened for eligibility with the last search conducted on 18 July 2022 (Fig.  1 ). Seventy-eight papers, each reporting a single intervention and using qualitative (n = 36), multi (19), or quantitative (23) methods, met the inclusion criteria. The characteristics of qualitative, quantitative, and multi-methods studies are summarised in Supplementary Tables 6, 7, and 8, respectively. The intervention effects for each study are summarised in Supplementary Tables 9 and 10.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA) Flow Diagram

Five interventions were at the microlevel, 37 were at the mesolevel, and 17 were at the macrolevel. The final 19 interventions straddled micro-meso, meso-macro, or micro–macro. No intervention covered all three levels or took a systems thinking approach.

The overall quality of each paper is detailed in Supplementary Tables 6–8, and ratings for each quality domain are in Supplementary Tables 3–5. Studies using quantitative methods (range 0.58–1.00; median = 0.92, Q1 = 0.82, Q3 = 1.00) had significantly higher quality than qualitative (range 0.41–0.91; median = 0.73, Q1 = 0.67, Q3 = 0.79; χ2(1) = 13.71, p  < 0.001) and multi-method studies (range 0.48–0.94; median = 0.76, Q1 = 0.63, Q3 = 0.82; χ2(1) = 21.96, p  < 0.001). There was no difference in the quality of qualitative and multi-methods studies ( p  = 0.97).

All quantitative studies articulated the research question and reported the results adequately. Randomisation and blinding were used in most studies. While estimates of variance and controlling for confounding were not consistently reported, 18 studies using quantitative methods were considered to be strong quality, and seven had a perfect score.

In reports of qualitative studies, the study design, context, and conclusion were generally addressed well. However, only six studies used verification processes (see Table 1 for definition). No qualitative study received a perfect score; 20 studies were considered to be good quality.

For multi-method studies, the objective, context, data collection, analysis, and conclusion were generally reported well. Blinding was not applicable, and estimates of variance and control of confounding were generally not reported. No multi-method study received a perfect score although the quality of six of multi-methods papers was assessed as good.

Corresponding authors were contacted to confirm ethics approval; authors of two papers confirmed that the study did not receive ethics approval, and authors from 16 studies did not respond or confirm whether they had ethics approval. The omission of evidence of ethical approval is concerning and should be addressed in all future research with humans. The 18 studies with respect to which we either could not confirm ethics approval or did not receive ethics approval were all published in highly ranked journals. Furthermore, it was not, in general, clear in the majority of papers which agency or organisation conducted the intervention or undertook the study (e.g. government agency, NGO, academic researchers) making it difficult to assess reflexivity, and the prospect of future implementation.

Included Interventions

Intervention sectors.

Interventions were implemented and evaluated in various sectors: education (26 interventions); politics (10); employment (8); information, communications, and technology (6); legal (5); economics (6); health (3); sustainable development and land rights (3); sport (3); and women’s and girls’ rights (2). Interventions in the areas of conflict and of water, sanitation, and hygiene were reported in one paper each.

Intervention Settings

Interventions were set evenly throughout the Global South (35 papers) and the Global North (39 papers). Interventions were evaluated in Africa (15), Europe (12), North America (19), Asia (10), Latin America (6), the Middle East and North Africa (4), the United Kingdom (6), and the Pacific (4). Just under half of the Global South interventions were conducted in rural settings (16/35), whereas Global North interventions tended to be urban (22/39) (Fig.  2 ).

Settings for interventions in Global North and South Countries

Research Participant Characteristics

Twenty-seven interventions included both women and men as participants, 30 included only women, and one intervention included only men. Thirteen studies did not report the gender of the sample, and in seven studies gender of the sample or population was not applicable (e.g. intervention sought to affect a broad population approach irrespective of gender, such as a new law that applied to the whole population in order to improve gender equality, or a collective political party that sought to influence gender issues in parliament). Thirty papers did not report other participant demographic characteristics. Where sample characteristics were reported, participants were 10–80 years of age, with education level ranging from none to post-graduate.

Study Characteristics

All papers but one (Devasia, 1998 ) were published after 2005. Most papers reported data gathered across years, with twelve interventions taking place over hours or weeks. The timeframe did not appear to be associated with whether or not the intervention had a significant beneficial effect on the aims of the intervention. For example, McGregor and Davies’ ( 2019 ) two year study of the effects of a pay equity campaign achieved its aim (legislation was enacted), but Hayhurst’s ( 2014 ) girls’ entrepreneurship study that ran for several years had harmful effects (girls income was taken by men). Similarly, Zawadzki et al., ( 2012 ) board game intervention that takes 60–90 min achieved its aims but Krishnan et al. ( 2014 ) conditional cash transfer study over a month had no effect on social change.

In the qualitative and multi-method studies, theoretical frameworks were rarely reported. The few papers that did report theoretical frameworks used feminist standpoint theory, post-structuralist feminist theory, or social constructivist theory. Qualitative data collection methods were diverse: interviews (41 studies), focus groups (19), document analysis (18), observations (15), case studies (2), and visual techniques (e.g. PhotoVoice) (2). Quantitative and multi-method studies predominantly used surveys and questionnaires (22), with one study each using of the following tools: Gender Equitable Men’s Scale (Gottert et al., 2016 ), the Knowledge of Gender Equity Scale, the Empathy Questionnaire (Spreng et al., 2009 ), the Feminist Identity Scale (Rickard, 1989 ), and the Gender Related System Justification scale (Jost & Kay, 2003 ).

Few interventions aimed to achieve gender equality per se. Rather, they aimed to achieve components of gender equality (see Table 1 for definition), which ranged from gender neutrality through to striving towards a feminist revolution. Overall aims included greater awareness, inclusion, empowerment, parity, equity, and substantive equality (Supplementary Tables 6–8, column 3). The evaluation of whether interventions achieved their aims was usually assessed through surveying participants. The most common aim was to enhance “empowerment” (n = 18), which was generally not clearly defined. The interventions had various levels of effectiveness, with 37 studies having a significant beneficial effect on the aim of the intervention (i.e., they achieved their aims); 31 having a partial beneficial impact on the aim of the intervention; four studies having no beneficial or harmful impact on the aim of the intervention; and six studies having a harmful effect on the aim of the intervention (e.g., the intervention led to increased discrimination, inequality, or abuse). Examples of harmful effects include the ‘Girl Effect’ program in Uganda which resulted in participants being abused or robbed of the money they had earned (Hayhurst, 2014 ), and a girls’ resiliency program in the USA that resulted in increased abuse from male peers (Brinkman et al., 2011 ).

Intervention Design and Effectiveness by Sector

Education and training interventions.

Evaluations of education and training interventions were reported in 18 papers (6 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 6 multi-methods). Education interventions covered a range contexts (3 micro-meso, 11 meso, 3 meso-macro, 1 macro). Most interventions (14) used awareness-raising workshops targeting individual change, and reported only partially achieving the aim of the interventions. Five workshops were assessed in randomised controlled trials. Two qualitative studies targeted increasing girls’ enrolment in formal education in Morocco (Eger et al., 2018 ) and India (Jain & Singh, 2017 ), both of which achieved the aims of the interventions. One qualitative study in the Democratic Republic of Congo targeted behaviour change in men only (Pierotti et al., 2018 ), which had a partial beneficial effect because men increased their willingness to contribute to household chores but maintained control over the broader gender system. This intervention was an eight-week long mesolevel men’s discussion group focused on “undoing gender” through social interaction (e.g. promoting a more equal division of labour in the household, improving intra-household relationship quality, and questioning existing gender norms).

Gender parity in schools did not signal an end to, or transformation of, gender inequities in the schools or communities studied (Ralfe, 2009 ). To bring about education policy reform, Palmén et al. ( 2020 ) found that top-down institutional commitment to gender equality was essential to create change. However, bottom-up strategies were also needed as teachers had to foster cooperative learning that encouraged working together and valuing different abilities across genders (Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ). Sufficient resources, in addition to monitoring and evaluation of education initiatives, were found to be a key to intervention success (Palmén et al., 2020 ). Ultimately, social norms did not change beyond the school environment (Chisamya et al., 2012 ; Jain & Singh, 2017 ).

While interventions in traditional education contexts only partially achieved their aims, experiential learning was found to be a powerful process to deliver knowledge about gender equity in a nonthreatening way (Zawadzki et al., 2012a ). Zawadzki’s study was a mesolevel intervention that used a board game to teach participants the cumulative effect of subtle, nonconscious bias, to discuss how bias hinders women’s promotion in the workplace, and to find solutions for what can be done to reduce that bias. They found that the delivery of information was less effective when new knowledge did not promote self-efficacy or lead participants to resist perceived attempts to influence their beliefs or behaviours. Furthermore, they established that learning about gender inequity was not sufficient for knowledge retention. Rather, participants had to link the knowledge to their own experiences and be empowered to feel that they could act on that knowledge.

Awareness-raising interventions in education and training generally only partially achieved the aims of the interventions, and did not necessarily translate into behaviour change (Ralfe, 2009 ). In the strong quality (0.93) quantitative mesolevel study by Moss-Racusin et al. ( 2018 ), the Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM (VIDS) intervention was found to achieve significantly greater awareness of bias in participants compared to the non-intervention control condition; however, effects on behaviour were not assessed. This intervention presented participants with short videos about findings from gender bias research in one of three conditions. One condition illustrated findings using narratives (compelling stories), the second presented the same results using expert interviews (straightforward facts), and a hybrid condition included both narrative and expert interview videos.

A lack of awareness, knowledge, or understanding of women’s human rights was found to be a key barrier to the achievement of gender equality in education-based interventions (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Gervais ( 2010 ) reported that awareness-raising can have direct effects on participants by giving them confidence to speak up against violations of their rights, although they noted that this might anger violators. Similarly, education was found in some cases to enable women to negotiate power-sharing with their husbands, while other women were verbally abused and threatened because their husbands disapproved of the education program (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Similar to the study by Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ), Murphy-Graham ( 2009 ) sought to “undo gender” by encouraging students to rethink gender relations in their everyday lives (mesolevel). Including men together with women in education programs enabled women to gauge men’s reactions to social change in a safe environment (Cislaghi et al., 2019 ). Potential harmful effects of interventions are further summarised under the ‘The problem of hostile affect’ header below.

STEM Education

Among education interventions were a subset of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) education interventions. These specifically targeted secondary school girls as a pathway to tertiary STEM education, and were reported in eight papers (1 qualitative, 3 quantitative, 4 multi methods). The design of interventions varied from science clubs, outreach programs, after school sessions, residential camps and immersion days. Archer et al. ( 2014 ), however, took a multipronged approach. Their intervention included school excursions, visits from STEM Ambassadors and a researcher-in-residence, a STEM ‘speed networking’ event, and participation in a series of teacher-led sessions for girls aged 13–14 years. Despite this significant investment, the intervention did not significantly change students’ aspirations of studying science, although it did appear to have a beneficial effect on broadening students’ understanding of the range of science jobs.

All STEM education interventions were aimed at the mesolevel and were located in the urban Global North. While the long-term impact (e.g. increased enrolment of women into tertiary STEM education) were inconsistent among studies. Gorbacheva et al. ( 2014 ) found that secondary same-sex education had no influence on this objective. Alternatively, Hughes et al. ( 2013 ) found having role models was more critical than sex segregation. Finally, Lackey et al. ( 2007 ), Lang et al. ( 2015 ) and Watermeyer ( 2012 ) all established that a network of support (e.g. family, school, industry) made a positive difference to girls equality in STEM education.

Employment Interventions

Eight interventions focused on women’s employment: 4 qualitative, 2 quantitative, 2 multi-methods studies. They covered a range of contexts (1 micro/meso, 5 meso, 2 meso/macro). Three interventions addressed women’s promotion (Eriksson‐Zetterquist & Styhre, 2008 ; Grada et al., 2015 ; Smith et al., 2015 ). Two interventions evaluated microenterprise; one produced harmful effects (Hayhurst, 2014 ), and the other only partially achieved its aim (Strier, 2010 ). Hayhurst ( 2014 ) evaluated an intervention auspiced by the Nike Foundation and concluded that it had an unfair and deleterious effect by placing the burden of social change on girls. In this intervention, focusing on the mesolevel, girls were taught to be entrepreneurs to enable them to escape abuse, buy land, grow food, and work. In practice, this economic empowerment strategy led to increased abuse by men who wanted to take the girls’ money to pay their own taxes and fines. This study was good quality (0.73). Participants in the study by Strier ( 2010 ) thought that microenterprise promised self-realisation and escape from the slavery of the labour market, but they found it to be a false promise, characterising the informal sector as both a disappointment and a fraud. Overall, employment interventions led to unreliable and inconsistent outcomes.

Economic Interventions

Six interventions (1 qualitative, 2 quantitative, 3 multi-methods studies) addressed various contexts (1 micro, 1 micro/macro, 2 meso/macro, 2 macro interventions) that targeted economic empowerment. Overall, the interventions partially achieved their aims. For microfinance interventions, women benefited less than men because they were given smaller loans for less lucrative businesses (Haase, 2012 ). Krishnan et al. ( 2014 ) conducted a good quality (0.79) multi-method study of a micro–macro level intervention that provided conditional cash transfers in India, and found minimal positive effects from the implementation of this scheme to address social behaviours related to valuing girls. In this study, parents had to register the birth of their daughter in order to receive financial benefit, but this did not transform the social mindset that daughters are a burden. In another study, the size and frequency of cash transfers directly influenced outcomes: large but infrequent payments enabled investment that could facilitate economic transformation (Morton, 2019 ). Lump-sum payments also challenged stereotypes about what women could invest in, and could transform the gender asset gap. Institution of a social protection floor (e.g. welfare benefits) enhanced women’s power and control over household decision-making in financial matters and household spending in South Africa (Patel et al., 2013 ). While a social protection floor had benefits for women’s empowerment at the microlevel, it did not transform unequal and unjust gendered social relations of power at the macrolevel.

Legal Interventions

Five interventions (3 qualitative, 2 quantitative studies) in two contexts (1 meso/macro, 4 macro) reported on legal interventions. In Zartaloudis’s ( 2015 ) qualitative macrolevel study of an employment strategy in Greece and Portugal, legislation was found to have an important but not transformative effect on gender equality in employment. Three other studies found that changes in law must be accompanied by incentives and penalties in order to be effective (Kim & Kang, 2016 ; Palmén et al., 2020 ; Singh & Peng, 2010 ). While the decline in levels of discrimination was at first sharp after enacting anti-discrimination legislation, its implementation plateaued over time, calling into question the long-term sustainable effects of law reform without adequate enforcement mechanisms. In this macrolevel study by Singh and Peng ( 2010 ), the Ontario Pay Equity Act was effective because it was proactive in persuing pay equity, rather than being complaint based.

Legal opportunity and litigation were strategic choices in campaign strategies in one study, playing an important role in effecting change to prevent discriminatory pay for work typically performed by women (McGregor & Davies, 2019 ). The strong quality (0.92) macrolevel study by Mueller et al. ( 2019 ) increased access to legal services in order to improve legal knowledge in rural Tanzania. It found that, despite increased access to legal services, women still had moderate to low knowledge of marital laws, and only 2.7 percent of women would refer someone to a paralegal for problems with a widow’s assets, divorce, or marital disputes. Mueller et al. ( 2019 ) concluded that an increased investment in access to justice needed to be made through informal channels (mesolevel change) in addition to the macrolevel law reform.

Political Interventions

Ten papers (4 qualitative, 3 quantitative, 3 multi-methods studies) that covered a variety of contexts (1 micro/meso, 2 meso, 2 meso/macro, 5 macro) reported assessments of political interventions. Electing women to council increased other women’s access to councillors because women had greater heterosocial networks (i.e., comprising women and men), but did not affect men’s access to councillors (Benstead, 2019 ; Levy & Sakaiya, 2020 ). However, increasing the number of women in public office did not necessarily improve equality (McLean & Maalsen, 2017 ). For example, an evaluation of gendered outcomes of Hon. Julia Gillard’s tenure as Prime Minister of Australia saw increased gender-based denigration and vilification of her leadership (McLean & Maalsen, 2017 ).

A qualitative macro study using interviews and ethnography to explore the impact of political gender quotas in Mali (Johnson, 2019 ) found that savings groups, together with political gender quotas, were important for catalysing the first steps towards social and political transformation. In Mali, gender quota laws required political parties to field a minimum of 30 percent women candidates, and to include a woman within the first three places on a party’s candidate list. In this context, savings and credit associations developed women’s self-efficacy and increased their confidence to become political candidates (Johnson, 2019 ).

An example of discursive change based on political activism was found by Cowell-Meyers’ ( 2017 ) multi-method study examining the impact of a new feminist political party in Sweden. Near consensus by political parties that gender equality needed to be tackled through government intervention was achieved through the efforts of the small women’s rights party. However, another multi-method mesolevel study examining the effects of Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs) in Europe found that they either ignored or subverted gender mainstreaming language (S. Lang, 2009 ). Gender mainstreaming policy interventions were found to have only partially achieved their aims, but were successful when law and policy detailed specific roles and responsibilities for action (Kim & Kang, 2016 ). Policymakers in two other studies were found to avoid the responsibility of implementation not because they opposed gender mainstreaming itself, but because they objected to being forced into it (Hwang & Wu, 2019 ; Kim & Kang, 2016 ). Therefore, the attitude of bureaucrats (microlevel) was considered to be an important factor in implementing gender equality initiatives at the macrolevel.

The strong (perfect quality score) quantitative study by Saguy and Szekeres ( 2018 ) reported on the effect on gender-based attitudes (microlevel) following exposure to the 2017 Women’s March across the US and worldwide in response to Donald Trump’s inauguration. The research found that large-scale collective action had a polarising effect on those exposed to it. Over time, men who identified more closely with their own gender increased the degree to which they justified gender inequality after exposure to the protests, suggesting a backlash reaction (mesolevel). People who were found to be positively affected by collective action were already in favour of the protesters’ cause. The backlash found for high-identifying men was explained by reactance theory (Brehm, 1966 ) whereby people become motivationally aroused by a threat to or elimination of a behavioral freedom (Brehm, 1989 ).

Barriers to Achieving Gender Equality: The Problem of Hostile Affect

No study accounted for men’s and boys’ emotions (microlevel change) as part of the aim and design of the intervention, but their significance became apparent in the results of several studies. Men and boys reported feeling hostility, resentment, fear and jealousy when social norms were challenged. Attempts at addressing gender inequality were found to threaten men’s sense of entitlement, and it was theorised that boys expected to be the centre of attention (Brinkman et al., 2011 ). In the meso study by MacPhail et al. ( 2019 ) that evaluated a men’s participation program in South Africa, participants reported equality as a zero-sum game that meant respecting women equated to disrespecting men. In that intervention, activities included intensive small group workshops, informal community dialogue through home visits, mural painting to stimulate discussions of key messages, informal theatre, soccer tournaments, and film screenings. In another study, women’s oppression was maintained by men because they feared losing control of ‘their’ women (Devasia, 1998 ). In several studies, men shared their fear of being perceived as weak or feminine in front of their peers or community (Bigler et al., 2019 ; McCarthy & Moon, 2018 ; Murphy-Graham, 2009 ; Pierotti et al., 2018 ; Singhal & Rattine-Flaherty, 2006 ). Male participants in the study by Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ) believed that allowing women to be leaders in households would disintegrate society. They believed that upholding men’s lack of accountability and position as ‘boss’ was important to maintaining the fabric of society.

In contrast, Cislaghi ( 2018 ) found that men in Senegal did not resist increased political participation of women. And a radio program in Afghanistan that addressed gender equality was found not to offend men’s cultural or religious beliefs, and ultimately succeeded in changing attitudes and behaviours towards women and girls (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). The outcome included changes in the community, such as giving permission to women to leave their home alone, to vote, to go to school, and to reject child marriage. While participants expressed increased empowerment (micro), they also acknowledged that they may have their rights, but can never make decisions pertaining to their rights (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). For example, women may have the right to vote (macro), but they cannot go to vote or decide who to vote for without male guardianship (meso). In that study, 15 h of civic education material was promoted by radio, focusing on peace, democracy, and women’s rights. At the community level, interviews and focus groups with participants revealed that there was no resistance to listening to the radio program from men or families. However, the Sengupta et al. study was not longitudinal and had a relatively small sample of 115 people (72.2% women), and the women in the study may not have been in a position that allowed them to admonish the men in their community.

It was found in one study that resistance and backlash can be ameliorated by including men and boys in the development and delivery of interventions (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). Behaviour change in men required an increase in empathy to achieve the aim of gender equality (Becker & Swim, 2011 ). Hadjipavlou ( 2006 ) and Vachhani and Pullen (2019) found that empathy was a viable alternative feminist strategy. In their qualitative study, Hwang and Wu ( 2019 ) in Taiwan found that trust-building between civil servants and advocates reduced resistance and hostility. Activists in this intervention used four strategies: (1) Giving praise and encouragement instead of criticism and blame; (2) Engaging civil servants on a personal level to create bonding; (3) Appeasing fears about being blamed by offering assistance; (4) Attempting to invoke their identification with the values of gender mainstreaming through informal educational efforts, all of which are mesolevel strategies.

Promoting Social Change to Reduce Gender Inequality

There was a wide array of types of change in different aspects of gender equality, with interventions varying in their success across settings and contexts. Table 2 summarises the types of change (e.g. legal, financial, behaviour, social) and the context (i.e., micro, meso, macro) that were identified and whether interventions aims were fully or partially achieved, or were not achieved, or had a harmful effect. Physical change, such as increased physical presence of women through inclusion or solidarity (meso) was the most consistently achieved beneficial outcome. Interventions targeting macrolevel social change, however, predominantly failed to achieve their aims or had harmful effects, reflecting how hard it is to realise social change, especially from a single, usually localised, intervention. Quotas could perhaps achieve their aim, although this finding was derived mostly from one good quality study (Johnson, 2019 ). The largest group of interventions were those implemented in education-based contexts, but these generally only partially achieved their aims, and focused mostly on physical changes (e.g., inclusion, solidarity). Most gender mainstreaming interventions did not achieved their aims.

Altogether, the findings confirm that social transformation is not automatic, easy, nor necessarily sustainable (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Furthermore, economic transformation is constrained if it is not supported by concurrent social transformation (Haase, 2012 ). One researcher, reporting a good quality meso-macro multi-method educational study in rural Bangladesh, claimed to have achieved social transformation (Sperandio, 2011 ). The appointment of women into roles that are traditionally occupied by men (in this case, teaching) led to widespread acceptance and normalisation of women in other non-traditional roles in a conservative village. Because the researcher did not interview or survey members of the community in which the intervention was evaluated, it is not clear whether broader social change was achieved.

It was found in several studies that dialogue was key to creating change in gender norms (Hwang & Wu, 2019 ; MacPhail et al., 2019 ; McGregor & Davies, 2019 ; Murphy-Graham, 2009 ; Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ). However, Matich et al.’s ( 2019 ) qualitative study of the #freethenipple campaign and Boling’s ( 2020 ) study of the #ShePersisted campaign found that small steps bring about only small changes. For instance, in the #freethenipple campaign, women took control of how they were represented (microlevel) in order to challenge patriarchal gender norms (macrolevel). The authors noted that, despite good intentions, a hashtag cannot erase stereotyping. Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ) also found that small changes (micro) in quotidian tasks (e.g., participation in household chores) did not lead to substantive social change (macrolevel change). That is, while changes in tasks occurred with relative ease, social transformation through the cumulative effect of small steps towards egalitarianism did not occur.

In comparison, the qualitative study by McCarthy and Moon ( 2018 ) examined a women’s program in Ghana and found that changing everyday practices did matter, but becoming cognisant of the need for revolution led people to become overwhelmed and immune to change efforts. The researchers found that a key challenge in achieving social transformation was the need to bring about changes in daily interactions. For instance, one participant stated that if a person is not empowered at home, no matter how much money you give them, they are going to need more (McCarthy & Moon, 2018 ).

All genders need to participate to achieve a re-socialisation (Brinkman et al., 2011 ). Sengupta et al. ( 2007 ) concluded that their radio program would have alienated men if it had targeted only women. By including all genders, potential resistance to change can be neutralised (Devasia, 1998 ). In summary, social transformation is possible, but transformation is not likely to be universal or successful across all contexts (Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ), particularly from any single monistic intervention. Holistic responses that take account of system thinking may create the change needed.

Overall, despite concerted effort, it seems that in the past thirty years we have not uncovered the keys to social change in order to enhance gender equality and non-discrimination against girls and women. Perhaps the reviewed interventions did not achieve macrolevel change because they did not simultaneously and explicitly address meso and micro change. Whilst CEDAW seeks the ‘elimination of all forms of discrimination’, achievement of that aim is far from complete, although it is not surprising that no single intervention could catalyse social change that achieves CEDAW’s objective. This review demonstrates that it will take time and a variety of endeavours to achieve gender equality.

To summarise the substantive lessons from this systematic review, we offer the following distillation as a summary of the findings to date. This distillation includes definitive statements that should be viewed only in the context of this review and may not generalise across all efforts towards gender equality in all societies.

What is Ineffective in Promoting Gender Equality

Small changes do not lead to big changes. Small concessions are granted to maintain peace, while big changes are often denied to maintain power.

Men and boys can feel the micro effects of fear, hostility, resentment, and jealousy when meso-macro gendered social norms are challenged.

Increased confidence, agency, empowerment, or individual leadership (micro) is not sufficient to promote the structural changes required to increase gender equality (macro).

A lack of change in mindsets (micro) and poor enforcement can mean that laws (macro) are not realised or have little effect at the community level (meso).

The overall focus on women ignores the real problem, and the need to engage with all members of society.

Education and awareness-raising may establish the right to education but do not necessarily create gender equality.

Raising awareness alone does not translate into behaviour change (meso to micro).

Transnational advocacy networks are not effective.

Protests in western democracies can have a polarising and backlash effect.

Gender mainstreaming efforts generally fail to achieve positive outcomes.

Economic transformation does not automatically lead to social transformation.

What is Effective in Promoting Gender Equality

Eliciting positive affect in interventions garners positive outcomes.

Empathy is a viable feminist strategy, although evidence is limited.

All genders need to participate in re-socialisation of gender norms.

Dialogue is a key to success.

A large number of women must behave differently for new behaviours to be accepted (micro to meso).

Experiential learning is a powerful way to embed knowledge about gender equity in a nonthreatening, lasting way.

Investment in access to justice must include informal channels of the justice system.

Social transformation can be achieved in households through daily interactions (meso to macro).

Enabling environments (macro) are more effective than individual empowerment (micro), but should include top-down and bottom-up approaches.

Quotas are effective.

Laws must be proactive as well as reactive or complaint based.

The contextual levels of analysis developed by Pettigrew ( 2021 ) has also been adapted from these lists into Fig. 3 . These distillations challenge our thinking about how to achieve gender equality and therefore require greater discussion amongst feminist activists, advocates, and the general population for ecological validation. The key findings of this review have implications for policy and practice because they call into question the type of change sought by feminist movements, the type of intervention used to achieve that change, and whether that intervention is likely to be effective in practice. Overall, this review gives pause for thought. We hope it will inform future decisions about how to achieve gender equality.

Contextual levels of analysis for this review, adapted from Pettigrew ( 2021 )

Strengths and Limitations

Our broad inclusion criteria identified relevant interventions across a range of political, economic, social and cultural contexts, published over a thirty year period. Consistent with the recommendations by Garritty et al. ( 2021 ) we used rapid review methods; this may have led to the omission of some eligible studies. However, the use of a machine learning approach by reviewer two to rapidly screen a sample of the records predicted to be most relevant helped to limit the omission of relevant studies. Moreover, our restriction of literature to 1990 onwards may have omitted some studies conducted since the adoption of CEDAW in 1979. Given that only one study was published from 1990–2000, however, it is unlikely that this restricted timeframe had a significant impact on the review. Excluding papers not published in English is a limitation, and may have led to the omission of studies in some settings. We urge those who have non-peer-reviewed evaluations to submit them to peer-reviewed journals for future inclusion in reviews like the present one. The results of the large number of studies included in the review are difficult to generalise given the heterogenous study methods, intervention designs, populations, and settings. Because of a lack of reflexivity in most qualitative and multi-method studies, it is impossible to discern (for example) whether research undertaken in the Global South was conducted by Global North researchers. Moreover, there was no evidence of the ethical conduct of 16 studies and two studies did not have ethics approval. Together, these limitations may indicate potential problems with informed consent and implicit racial or other biases, although none were explicitly identifiable. There was insufficient evidence to assess whether and how culture played a part in attempts to achieve gender equality. Furthermore, while 86 percent of interventions predominantly or partially achieved their aims, this may inflate the effectiveness of such interventions because of reporting biases that favour publication of positive results (Sengupta et al., 2007 ; Sperandio, 2011 ).

This review has taken stock of successes and failures in seeking to promote gender equality. The findings reveal that undue reliance has been placed on the presumed efficacy of awareness raising, and that the race to achieve gender parity has not yet catalysed the desired social transformation. Entrepreneur programs can be exploitative, and legal actions have had limited effects, potentially failing because of men’s feelings about change. This review has shown that men can be fearful, resentful, jealous, and angry towards acts that disrupt the status quo . Until we adequately address these emotions and biases, the change that women (and potentially all genders) want, and the equality we all need will not be realised. Social context and systems thinking have shown us the importance of holism when tackling systemic discrimination. In this context, to be fully human is to be emotionally fulfilled. Ergo , human rights will be realised when there is dignity, humanity and positive emotionality among genders. Only then is the promise of CEDAW likely to be fulfilled.

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Dillon, J. (2014). ‘It didn’t really change my opinion’: Exploring what works, what doesn’t and why in a school science, technology, engineering and mathematics careers intervention. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32 (1), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2013.865601

Article   Google Scholar  

Arnold, R. D., & Wade, J. P. (2015). A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach. Procedia Computer Science, 44 , 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.050

Banerjee, D., & Lowalekar, H. (2021). Communicating for change: A systems thinking approach. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34 (5), 1018–1035. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-10-2020-0325

Becker, J. C., & Swim, J. K. (2011). Seeing the unseen: Attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35 (2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684310397509

Benstead, L. J. (2019). Do female local councilors improve women’s representation? The Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 10 (2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520844.2019.1580085

Bigler, C., Amacker, M., Ingabire, C., & Birachi, E. (2019). A view of the transformation of Rwanda’s highland through the lens of gender: A mixed-method study about unequal dependents on a mountain system and their well-being. Journal of Rural Studies, 69 , 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.05.001

Boling, K. S. (2020). #ShePersisted, Mitch: A memetic critical discourse analysis on an attempted Instagram feminist revolution. Feminist Media Studies, 20 (7), 966–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1620821

Bourey, C., Williams, W., Bernstein, E. E., & Stephenson, R. (2015). Systematic review of structural interventions for intimate partner violence in low- and middle-income countries: Organizing evidence for prevention. BMC Public Health, 15 , 62.

Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance . Academic Press.

Google Scholar  

Brehm, J. W. (1989). Psychological Reactance: Theory and Applications. Advances in Consumer Research, 16 (1), 72–75. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=bth&AN=6487682&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8849760

Brinkman, B. G., Brinkman, K. G., & Toomey, S. (2011). What to do about the boys? Advocating for system change when doing social justice work with girls. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 3 (2), 53–70.

Chisamya, G., DeJaeghere, J., Kendall, N., & Khan, M. A. (2012). Gender and education for all: Progress and problems in achieving gender equity. International Journal of Educational Development, 32 (6), 743–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.10.004

Cislaghi, B. (2018). The story of the “now-women”: Changing gender norms in rural West Africa. Development in Practice, 28 (2), 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2018.1420139

Cislaghi, B., Denny, E. K., Cissé, M., Gueye, P., Shrestha, B., Shrestha, P. N., & Clark, C. J. (2019). Changing social norms: The importance of “organized diffusion” for scaling up community health promotion and women empowerment interventions. Prevention Science, 20 (6), 936–946. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-00998-3

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cislaghi, B., & Heise, L. (2020). Gender norms and social norms: Differences, similarities and why they matter in prevention science. Sociology of Health & Illness, 42 (2), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13008

Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22 (10), 1435–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cowell-Meyers, K. (2017). The contagion effects of the feminist initiative in Sweden: Agenda-setting, niche parties and mainstream parties. Scandinavian Political Studies, 40 (4), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12097

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches . Sage.

Devasia, L. (1998). Safe drinking water and its acquisition: Rural women’s participation in water management in Maharashtra, India. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 14 (4), 537.

Eger, C., Miller, G., & Scarles, C. (2018). Gender and capacity building: A multi-layered study of empowerment. World Development, 106 , 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.01.024

Eriksson-Zetterquist, U., & Styhre, A. (2008). Overcoming the glass barriers: Reflection and action in the ‘Women to the Top’ programme. Gender, Work & Organization, 15 (2), 133–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00366.x

Facio, A., & Morgan, M. (2009). Equity or equality for women? Understanding CEDAW’s equality principles . Springer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., King, V. J., Hamel, C., Kamel, C., & Stevens, A. (2021). Cochrane rapid reviews methods group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130 , 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007

Gervais, C. (2010). From discovery to dissidence: Honduran women's conceptions and claims of human rights. Journal of International Women's Studies, 11 , 19+. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A247222961/AONE?u=monash&sid=AONE&xid=4fe4737c

Giummarra, M. J., Lau, G., & Gabbe, B. J. (2020). Evaluation of text mining to reduce screening workload for injury-focused systematic reviews. Injury Prevention, 26 (1), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2019-043247

Gorbacheva, E., Craig, A., Beekhuyzen, J., & Coldwell-Neilson, J. (2014). ICT Interventions for girls: Factors influencing ICT career intentions. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 18 (3), 864. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v18i3.1103

Gottert, A., Barrington, C., Pettifor, A., McNaughton-reyes, H. L., Maman, S., Macphail, C., & Lippman, S. A. (2016). Measuring men’s gender norms and gender role conflict/stress in a high HIV-prevalence South African setting. AIDS and Behavior, 20 (8), 1785–1795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-016-1374-1

Grada, A. O., Caitríona Ní, L., Linehan, C., Boylan, G., & Connolly, L. (2015). Naming the parts: A case-study of a gender equality initiative with academic women. Gender in Management, 30 (5), 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-09-2013-0118

Haase, D. (2012). Revolution, interrupted: Gender and microfinance in Nicaragua. Critical Sociology, 38 (2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920511404443

Hadjipavlou, M. (2006). No permission to cross: Cypriot women’s dialogue across the divide. Gender, Place & Culture, 13 (4), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690600808429

Hayhurst, L. M. C. (2014). The ‘Girl Effect’ and martial arts: Social entrepreneurship and sport, gender and development in Uganda. Gender, Place & Culture, 21 (3), 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2013.802674

Hughes, R. M., Nzekwe, B., & Molyneaux, K. J. (2013). The Single Sex Debate for Girls in Science: A Comparison Between two informal science programs on middle school students’ STEM identity formation. Research in Science Education, 43 (5), 1979–2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9345-7

Hwang, S.-L., & Wu, W.-T. (2019). Social capital and feminist power: Promoting gender mainstreaming in Taiwan. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 21 (5), 724–745. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2019.1606724

IDOS. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.idos-research.de/en/the-current-column/article/from-gender-parity-to-gender-equality-changing-womens-lived-realities/

Jain, S., & Singh, S. (2017). Prerna: Engendering empowerment through girl education. The International Journal of Educational Management, 31 (4), 518–529. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2016-0061

Johnson, C. E. (2019). Why rural Malian women want to be candidates for local office: Changes in social and political life and the arrival of a gender quota. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 57 (3), 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X19000296

Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2003). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. In . Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis.

Karakurt, G., Koç, E., Çetinsaya, E. E., Ayluçtarhan, Z., & Bolen, S. (2019). Meta-analysis and systematic review for the treatment of perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 105 , 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.08.006

Kim, D.-S., & Kang, M. (2016). Rapid growth—What’s next for gender mainstreaming? Analyzing the gender impact assessment system in Korea. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 37 (2), 168–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2016.1152875

Kmet, L. M., Cook, L. S., & Lee, R. C. (2004). Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields . Retrieved from Edmonton: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR), AHFMR - HTA Initiative #13. 2004, 1–22

Krishnan, A., Amarchand, R., Byass, P., Pandav, C., & Ng, N. (2014). “No one says ‘No’ to money” - A mixed methods approach for evaluating conditional cash transfer schemes to improve girl children’s status in Haryana, India. International Journal for Equity in Health, 13 , 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-13-11

Lackey, J. F., Borkin, S. S., Torti, V., Welnetz, T., & Moberg, D. P. (2007). Behind the findings: Yes, the science explorations program worked, but why? Curator: The Museum Journal, 50 (3), 319–340.

Lang, C., Fisher, J., Craig, A., & Forgasz, H. (2015). Outreach programmes to attract girls into computing: How the best laid plans can sometimes fail. Computer Science Education, 25 (3), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1067008

Lang, S. (2009). Assessing advocacy: European transnational women’s networks and gender mainstreaming. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 16 (3), 327–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxp016

Levy, H. I., & Sakaiya, S. (2020). Effect of deliberation style on the gender gap in deliberative participation. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 21 (3), 158–175. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109920000055

MacPhail, C., Khoza, N., Treves-Kagan, S., Selin, A., Gómez-Olivé, X., Peacock, D., & Pettifor, A. (2019). Process elements contributing to community mobilization for HIV risk reduction and gender equality in rural South Africa. PLoS One . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225694

Matich, M., Ashman, R., & Parsons, E. (2019). #freethenipple – digital activism and embodiment in the contemporary feminist movement. Consumption Markets & Culture, 22 (4), 337–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2018.1512240

McCarthy, L., & Moon, J. (2018). Disrupting the gender institution: Consciousness-raising in the cocoa value chain. Organization Studies, 39 (9), 1153–1177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618787358

McGregor, J., & Davies, S. G. (2019). Achieving pay equity: Strategic mobilization for substantive equality in Aotearoa New Zealand. Gender, Work & Organization, 26 (5), 619–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12253

McLean, J., & Maalsen, S. (2017). ‘We don’t want it to be like that for her again’: Gendered leadership and online feminism in Australian politics and planning. Australian Planner, 54 (1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2017.1297316

Morton, G. D. (2019). The power of lump sums: Using maternity payment schedules to reduce the gender asset gap in households reached by Brazil’s Bolsa Família conditional cash transfer. World Development, 113 , 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.012

Moss-Racusin, C. A., Pietri, E., Hennes, E., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V., & Roussos, G. (2018). Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24 (2), 236–260.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mueller, V., Peterman, A., Billings, L., & Wineman, A. (2019). Exploring impacts of community-based legal aid on intrahousehold gender relations in Tanzania. Feminist Economics, 25 (2), 116–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2018.1554906

Murphy-Graham, E. (2009). Constructing a new vision: Undoing gender through secondary education in Honduras. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, 55 (5/6), 503–521. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40608075

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372 , n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Palmén, R., Arroyo, L., Müller, J., Reidl, S., Caprile, M., & Unger, M. (2020). Integrating the gender dimension in teaching, research content and knowledge and technology transfer: Validating the EFFORTI evaluation framework through three case studies in Europe. Evaluation and Program Planning, 79 , 101751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101751

Parsons, D., Cordier, R., Vaz, S., & Lee, H. C. (2017). Parent-mediated intervention training delivered remotely for children with autism spectrum disorder living outside of urban areas: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19 (8), 45. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6651

Patel, L., Hochfeld, T., & Moodley, J. (2013). Gender and child sensitive social protection in South Africa. Development Southern Africa, 30 (1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2012.755872

Pettigrew, T. F. (2021). Contextual social psychology: Reanalysing prejudice, voting and intergroup contact . American Psychological Association.

Pierotti, R. S., Lake, M., & Lewis, C. (2018). Equality on his terms: Doing and undoing gender through men’s discussion groups. Gender & Society, 32 (4), 540–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243218779779

Plüddemann, A., Aronson, J. K., Onakpoya, I., Heneghan, C., & Mahtani, K. R. (2018). Redefining rapid reviews: A flexible framework for restricted systematic reviews. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 23 (6), 201. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110990

Ralfe, E. (2009). Policy: Powerful or pointless? An exploration of the role of critical literacy in challenging and changing gender stereotypes. The Language Learning Journal, 37 (3), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730903208470

Rickard, K. M. (1989). The relationship of self-monitored dating behaviors to level of feminist identity on the Feminist Identity Scale. Sex Roles, 20 (3), 213.

Saguy, T., & Szekeres, H. (2018). Changing minds via collective action: Exposure to the 2017 Women’s March predicts decrease in (some) men’s gender system justification over time. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21 (5), 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217750475

Sánchez-Hernández, N., Martos-García, D., Soler, S., & Flintoff, A. (2018). Challenging gender relations in PE through cooperative learning and critical reflection. Sport, Education and Society, 23 (8), 812–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1487836

Sengupta, A., Long, E. G., Singhal, A., & Shefner-Rogers, C. L. (2007). The Sada says `We women have our rights’: A gender analysis of an ICT initiative in Afghanistan. International Communication Gazette, 69 (4), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048507079006

Singh, P., & Peng, P. (2010). Canada’s bold experiment with pay equity. Gender in Management, 25 (7), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011081374

Singhal, A., & Rattine-Flaherty, E. (2006). Pencils and photos as tools of communicative research and praxis: Analyzing Minga Perú’s quest for social justice in the Amazon. International Communication Gazette, 68 (4), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048506065764

Smith, J. L., Handley, I. M., Zale, A. V., Rushing, S., & Potvin, M. A. (2015). Now Hiring! Empirically testing a three-step intervention to increase faculty gender diversity in STEM. BioScience, 65 (11), 1084–1087. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/90007459

Sperandio, J. (2011). Context and the gendered status of teachers: Women’s empowerment through leadership of non-formal schooling in rural Bangladesh. Gender and Education, 23 (2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540251003674097

Spreng, R. N., McKinnon, M. C., Mar, R. A., & Levine, B. (2009). The Toronto empathy questionnaire: Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91 (1), 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802484381

Strier, R. (2010). Women, poverty, and the microenterprise: Context and discourse. Gender, Work & Organization, 17 (2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00486.x

Techtarget. (2022). Retrieved from https://www.techtarget.com/searchcio/definition/qualitative-data#:~:text=Qualitative%20data%20is%20information%20that,graph%20databases%2C%20timelines%20and%20infographics

UNESCO. (2003). Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/en/glossary-term/gender-equity

UNICEF. (2017). Gender Equality: glossary of terms and concepts.

United Nations. (1997). Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997. A/52/3.18 .

University of Warwick. (2022). Retrieved from https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/ces/research/current/socialtheory/maps/reflexivity/

Wallace, B. C., Small, K., Brodley, C. E., Lau, J., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2012). Deploying an interactive machine learning system in an evidence-based practice center: abstrackr . Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium, Miami, Florida, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2110363.2110464

Watermeyer, R. (2012). Confirming the legitimacy of female participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM): Evaluation of a UK STEM initiative for girls. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 33 (5), 679–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2012.678751

World Economic Forum. (2022). The Global Gender Gap Report . Retrieved from https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2022.pdf

Yakubovich, A. R. M., Stöckl, H. P., Murray, J. P., Melendez-Torres, G. J. P., Steinert, J. I. M., Glavin, C. E. Y. M., & Humphreys, D. K. P. (2018). Risk and protective factors for intimate partner violence against women: Systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective–longitudinal studies. American Journal of Public Health, 108 (7), E1–E11. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304428

Zartaloudis, S. (2015). Money, empowerment and neglect - The Europeanization of gender equality promotion in Greek and Portuguese employment policies. Social Policy & Administration, 49 (4), 530–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12146

Zawadzki, M. J., Danube, C. L., & Shields, S. A. (2012). How to talk about gender inequity in the workplace: Using WAGES as an experiential learning tool to reduce reactance and promote self-efficacy. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 67 (11–12), 605–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0181-z

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. MJG was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Research Award (DE170100726). MG was supported by a Monash University Research Training Program stipend.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Central Clinical School, Monash University, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

Michaela Guthridge & Melita J. Giummarra

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

Maggie Kirkman

Faculty of Law, Monash University, 15 Ancora Imparo Way Wellington Road, Clayton, 3800, Australia

Michaela Guthridge

Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, 3125, Australia

Tania Penovic

Caulfield Pain Management and Research Centre, Caulfield Hospital, 260 Kooyong Road, Caulfield, VIC, 3162, Australia

Tania Penovic & Melita J. Giummarra

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michaela Guthridge .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 202 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Guthridge, M., Kirkman, M., Penovic, T. et al. Promoting Gender Equality: A Systematic Review of Interventions. Soc Just Res 35 , 318–343 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00398-z

Download citation

Accepted : 17 August 2022

Published : 01 September 2022

Issue Date : September 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00398-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Gender equality
• Discrimination against women
• Behaviour change
• Social change
• Systematic review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How our education system undermines gender equity

Subscribe to the brown center on education policy newsletter, and why culture change—not policy—may be the solution, joseph cimpian jc joseph cimpian associate professor of economics and education policy - new york university.

April 23, 2018

There are well-documented achievement and opportunity gaps by income and race/ethnicity. K-12 accountability policies often have a stated goal of reducing or eliminating those gaps, though with questionable effectiveness . Those same accountability policies require reporting academic proficiency by gender, but there are no explicit goals of reducing gender gaps and no “hard accountability” sanctions tied to gender-subgroup performance. We could ask, “Should gender be included more strongly in accountability policies?”

In this post, I’ll explain why I don’t think accountability policy interventions would produce real gender equity in the current system—a system that largely relies on existing state standardized tests of math and English language arts to gauge equity. I’ll argue that although much of the recent research on gender equity from kindergarten through postgraduate education uses math or STEM parity as a measure of equity, the overall picture related to gender equity is of an education system that devalues young women’s contributions and underestimates young women’s intellectual abilities more broadly.

In a sense, math and STEM outcomes simply afford insights into a deeper, more systemic problem. In order to improve access and equity across gender lines from kindergarten through the workforce, we need considerably more social-questioning and self-assessment of biases about women’s abilities.

As soon as girls enter school, they are underestimated

For over a decade now, I have studied gender achievement with my colleague Sarah Lubienski, a professor of math education at Indiana University-Bloomington. In a series of studies using data from both the 1998-99 and 2010-11 kindergarten cohorts of the nationally representative Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, we found that no average gender gap in math test scores existed when boys and girls entered kindergarten, but a gap of nearly 0.25 standard deviations developed in favor of the boys by around second or third grade.

For comparison purposes, the growth of the black-white math test score gap was virtually identical to the growth in the gender gap. Unlike levels and growth in race-based gaps, though, which have been largely attributed to a combination of differences in the schools attended by black and white students and to socio-economic differences, boys and girls for the most part attend the same schools and come from families of similar socio-economic status. This suggests that something may be occurring within schools that contributes to an advantage for boys in math.

Exploring deeper, we found that the beliefs that teachers have about student ability might contribute significantly to the gap. When faced with a boy and a girl of the same race and socio-economic status who performed equally well on math tests and whom the teacher rated equally well in behaving and engaging with school, the teacher rated the boy as more mathematically able —an alarming pattern that replicated in a separate data set collected over a decade later .

Another way of thinking of this is that in order for a girl to be rated as mathematically capable as her male classmate, she not only needed to perform as well as him on a psychometrically rigorous external test, but also be seen as working harder than him. Subsequent matching and instrumental variables analyses suggested that teachers’ underrating of girls from kindergarten through third grade accounts for about half of the gender achievement gap growth in math. In other words, if teachers didn’t think their female students were less capable, the gender gap in math might be substantially smaller.

An interaction that Sarah and I had with a teacher drove home the importance and real-world relevance of these results. About five years ago, while Sarah and I were faculty at the University of Illinois, we gathered a small group of elementary teachers together to help us think through these findings and how we could intervene on the notion that girls were innately less capable than boys. One of the teachers pulled a stack of papers out of her tote bag, and spreading them on the conference table, said, “Now, I don’t even understand why you’re looking at girls’ math achievement. These are my students’ standardized test scores, and there are absolutely no gender differences. See, the girls can do just as well as the boys if they work hard enough.” Then, without anyone reacting, it was as if a light bulb went on. She gasped and continued, “Oh my gosh, I just did exactly what you said teachers are doing,” which is attributing girls’ success in math to hard work while attributing boys’ success to innate ability. She concluded, “I see now why you’re studying this.”

Although this teacher did ultimately recognize her gender-based attribution, there are (at least) three important points worth noting. First, her default assumption was that girls needed to work harder in order to achieve comparably to boys in math, and this reflects an all-too-common pattern among elementary school teachers, across at least the past couple decades and in other cultural contexts . Second, it is not obvious how to get teachers to change that default assumption. Third, the evidence that she brought to the table was state standardized test scores, and these types of tests can reveal different (often null or smaller) gender achievement gaps than other measures.

On this last point, state standardized tests consistently show small or no differences between boys and girls in math achievement, which contrasts with somewhat larger gaps on NAEP and PISA , as well as with gaps at the top of the distribution on the ECLS , SAT Mathematics assessment, and the American Mathematics Competition . The reasons for these discrepancies are not entirely clear, but what is clear is that there is no reason to expect that “hardening” the role of gender in accountability policies that use existing state tests and current benchmarks will change the current state of gender gaps. Policymakers might consider implementing test measures similar to those where gaps have been noted and placing more emphasis on gains throughout the achievement distribution. However, I doubt that a more nuanced policy for assessing math gains would address the underlying problem of the year-after-year underestimation of girls’ abilities and various signals and beliefs that buttress boys’ confidence and devalue girls, all of which cumulatively contributes to any measured gaps.

More obstacles await women in higher education and beyond

Looking beyond K-12 education, there is mounting evidence at the college and postgraduate levels that cultural differences between academic disciplines may be driving women away from STEM fields, as well as away from some non-STEM fields (e.g., criminal justice, philosophy, and economics). In fact, although research and policy discussions often dichotomize academic fields and occupations as “STEM” and “non-STEM,” the emerging research on gender discrimination in higher education finds that the factors that drive women away from some fields cut across the STEM/non-STEM divide. Thus, while gender representation disparities between STEM and non-STEM fields may help draw attention to gender representation more broadly, reifying the STEM/non-STEM distinction and focusing on math may be counterproductive to understanding the underlying reasons for gender representation gaps across academic disciplines.

In a recent study , my colleagues and I examined how perceptions on college majors relate to who is entering those majors. We found that the dominant factor predicting the gender of college-major entrants is the degree of perceived discrimination against women. To reach this conclusion, we used two sources of data. First, we created and administered surveys to gather perceptions on how much math is required for a major, how much science is required, how creative a field is, how lucrative careers are in a field, how helpful the field is to society, and how difficult it is for a woman to succeed in the field. After creating factor scales on each of the six dimensions for each major, we mapped those ratings onto the second data source, the Education Longitudinal Study, which contains several prior achievement, demographic, and attitudinal measures on which we matched young men and women attending four-year colleges.

Among this nationally representative sample, we found that the degree to which a field was perceived to be math- or science-intensive had very little relation to student gender. However, fields that were perceived to discriminate against women were strongly predictive of the gender of the students in the field, whether or not we accounted for the other five traits of the college majors. In short, women are less likely to enter fields where they expect to encounter discrimination.

And what happens if a woman perseveres in obtaining a college degree in a field where she encounters discrimination and underestimation and wants to pursue a postgraduate degree in that field, and maybe eventually work in academia? The literature suggests additional obstacles await her. These obstacles may take the form of those in the field thinking she’s not brilliant like her male peers in graduate school, having her looks discussed on online job boards when she’s job-hunting, performing more service work if she becomes university faculty, and getting less credit for co-authored publications in some disciplines when she goes up for tenure.

Each of the examples here and throughout this post reflects a similar problem—education systems (and society) unjustifiably and systematically view women as less intellectually capable.

Societal changes are necessary

My argument that policy probably isn’t the solution is not intended to undercut the importance of affirmative action and grievance policies that have helped many individuals take appropriate legal recourse. Rather, I am arguing that those policies are certainly not enough, and that the typical K-12 policy mechanisms will likely have no real effect in improving equity for girls.

The obstacles that women face are largely societal and cultural. They act against women from the time they enter kindergarten—instilling in very young girls a belief they are less innately talented than their male peers—and persist into their work lives. Educational institutions—with undoubtedly many well-intentioned educators—are themselves complicit in reinforcing the hurdles. In order to dismantle these barriers, we likely need educators at all levels of education to examine their own biases and stereotypes.

Related Content

Michael Hansen, Diana Quintero

July 10, 2018

Jaymes Pyne

July 30, 2020

Tom Loveless

March 24, 2015

Education Access & Equity Higher Education K-12 Education

Governance Studies

Brown Center on Education Policy

September 24, 2024

Michael Trucano, Sopiko Beriashvili

September 20, 2024

Megan Kuhfeld, Karyn Lewis

The International Foundation for Gender Education

• Create new account
• Request new password

Book navigation

• APA DSM-5 Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders

Review of Related Literature on Gender, Elementary Students, and Technology

by Nicole Luongo ?Sitting in the same classroom, reading the same textbook, listening to the same teacher, boys and girls receive very different educations? (Sadker & Sadker, 1994a, p. 1). This quote by Sadker and Sadker portrays how gender affects the educational experience of many students in today?s educational world. This review of the literature examines the connection between gender, elementary students, and technology. In order to gain a full understanding of the correlation between gender and technology in elementary school classrooms, the researcher considered relevant past findings and informative literature related to the subjects. Much of the research that has been conducted on gender and technology was additionally associated with gender and other educational subjects such as mathematics and science. Methodology: The researcher used several methods to locate and retrieve data for this literature review (Galvan, 1999). Gall, Gall, and Borg (1999) suggested four steps in the literature review process: searching preliminary sources, using secondary sources, reading primary sources, and synthesizing the literature. Initially, the researcher searched for preliminary sources using relevant databases, which were available through the Nova Southeastern University online library. The researcher searched the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Dissertation Abstracts, and Wilson Web using the following keywords or descriptors: gender, sex, gender bias, gender equity, technology, technology use, computer, elementary, and education. After the initial search was narrowed down through trial and error, the researcher shortened the list to a manageable size. The researcher found that searching for the keywords gender, gender equity, technology, and elementary provided many of the desired results. In addition to the database searches, the researcher employed Internet search functions such as the Yahoo and Google search engines to find additional preliminary and secondary sources. These search engines provided links to a variety of information on gender, elementary education, and technology. The Internet searches allowed the researcher to get a sense of the gender and technology websites that are accessible to the public. Many of these websites provided reference pages and links that the researcher included in the literature review. During the next phase of the research process, the researcher selected the most appropriate articles and books (Galvan, 1999). As the researcher examined the most current articles, she used their reference pages as useful indicators for further investigation. These reference pages helped the researcher locate many theoretical articles on the subject. Furthermore, the reference pages assisted in the discovery of several landmark studies (American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, 1992, 2000; Sadker & Sadker, 1994). Once the preliminary database and Internet searches were completed, the researcher collected books, book reviews, journal articles, dissertation abstracts, and reports using a variety of sources such as the local libraries and the Nova Southeastern University library. After synthesizing the literature, the researcher divided the literature review into several sections. The first section of the literature review discusses gender issues in the general education setting. These studies and research projects originated from various educational perspectives and backgrounds. The second section focuses on gender issues prevalent in elementary schools. It examines past, present, and predicted future elementary educational gender patterns. Finally, the researcher examines the connection between gender and technology use in the elementary classroom. Analysis and Discussion: Gender Differences in Education Over the past several decades, the topics of gender equity and gender differences have been rising issues in education (Sprinthall, Sprinthall, & Oja, 1994). Sadker and Sadker (1994a) claimed that when educational inequality is mentioned, most people instinctively think of racial inequality. The authors suggested that the issues of sexism and gender discrimination are often overlooked. ?While the record of racial injustice is at the forefront of our national conscience, history books still do not tell the story of profound sexism at school? (Sadker & Sadker, p. 15). Recently, national educational reforms have begun to acknowledge gender differences between female and male students. Definitions of Gender and Gender Bias Although the terms sex and gender are used interchangeably in many writings, some authors have differentiated between the terms (American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, 1992; Sanders, 2003). In its 1992 report, the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation used the term sex to refer to individuals as biologically female or male. On the other hand, the AAUW report used the term gender to denote the set of expectations imposed by society on girls and boys simply because they are female or male. Sanders explained that sex is the way in which an individual was born, whereas gender is what the individual learns about the proper way for the sexes to behave. Gender bias is another term that has been defined by various theorists (e. g., Owens, Smothers, & Love, 2003; Sanders, 2002b). Owens, Smothers, and Love defined gender bias in education as the treatment of boys and girls differently in schools. Gender bias includes how teachers respond to students, what subjects and topics students are encouraged to study, and how textbooks and other materials represent gender roles. In addition, Sanders claimed that it is society?s emphasis on gender differences that creates two separate sets of values, beliefs, and assumptions for girls and for boys that restrict opportunities for each gender. History of Title IX In 1972, Congress approved a law that required schools to provide equal educational opportunities to both boys and girls (Shapiro, Kramer, & Hunerberg, 1981). This law was known as Title IX and stated, ?No person in the United States shall on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance? (Shapiro, Kramer, & Hunerberg, p. 139). Under Title IX, gender bias was outlawed in school athletics, career counseling, medical services, financial aid, admission practices, and treatment of students (Sadker & Sadker, 1994a). The law declared that if schools did not follow Title IX, they would lose federal funding. Three years after the law was passed, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare developed specific guidelines to help schools follow the Title IX regulations. Even with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare guidelines, teachers and administrators continued to struggle with the Title IX law (AAUW Educational Foundation, 1992; Shapiro, Kramer, & Hunerberg, 1981). Shapiro, Kramer, and Hunerberg cited several reasons for this problem. Most likely, teachers and administrators possess gender bias because they are products of the schools in which they now teach. Thereby, the gender stereotypes and attitudes that were present when they attended school are unconsciously established in their beliefs and teaching behaviors. Some researchers (e. g., AAUW Educational Foundation, 1992; Shapiro, Kramer, & Hunerberg, 1981) maintain that educators possess a lack of awareness and understanding of Title IX. Hence, many teachers and administrators have a ?less than a complete grasp of what Title IX covers? (Shapiro, Kramer, & Hunerberg, p. 140). The regulations brought upon the field of education by Title IX are long, complex, and detailed; the regulations range from pre-school level to college level, making comprehension of the law even more difficult. The AAUW report studied 25 rural school districts in 21 states, and found that 37 percent of school administrators saw no Title IX compliance issues in their schools. Yet, the AAUW found Title IX violations appeared to exist in these schools in several forms. Nature Versus Nurture Throughout time, there has been a debate over whether the differences between males and females are learned or innate (Sprinthall, Sprinthall, & Oja, 1994). Sprinthall, Sprinthall, and Oja discussed two main schools of thought regarding gender differences and psychology: environmentalism and geneticism. Environmentalists explain gender differences as learned; they feel the differences are a direct result of the way our society and culture treats and differentiates between the genders. Sanders (2003) maintained these imbalances begin ?with the pink and blue receiving blankets which are still used in hospitals today? (p. 26). On the other hand, geneticists insist that the gender differences are innate. They claim that the cultural argument has been generalized far beyond the physiological facts. Geneticists, such as neurologist Richard Restak, claim that ?there are indeed fundamental differences, both chemical and morphological, between the male and female brains? (Sprinthall, Sprinthall, & Oja, p. 65). Environmentalists such as Pollack (1998) believe that nurture and an individual?s environment have a greater effect than nature on the formation of gender differences. Pollack?s research focused on the myths surrounding boys and education. Since Pollack found that nurture played a large part in the composition of boys, the author argued that most of the myths surrounding boys are false. One myth suggested that the nature of a boy?s physical composition will win out over his nurturing environment. Pollack disagreed with this concept by claiming, ?My clinical experience and research?as well as work done by others?have shown that most boys, when lovingly nurtured themselves, will in turn nurture and show empathy for others? (p. 91). Moreover, Pollack renounced the claim that ?boys should be boys? (p. 94) by fulfilling the stereotypical model of the dominant and assertive male. Pollack stressed that masculinity is diverse; in fact, there are many ways to be a boy. Finally, Pollack challenged the myth that there is something inherently dangerous and toxic about boys. In reality, the author found sufficient evidence that boys are highly empathetic. In contrast, geneticists believe that nature plays the pivotal role in gender differences (Gurian, 1996; Johns Hopkins Medical Institute, 2000). After studying boys and their physical compositions, Gurian concluded that biology, not society, has created a gap between the two genders. Gurian discussed the importance of testosterone and how the male brain works. Although Gurian explained that there is clear evidence of male and female brain differences, he emphasized that brain research does not mean biology is destiny. More accurately, biology is proclivity. When discussing the nature of what he called ?boy culture? (p. 121), Gurian asked, ?What can we do for it? It will form whether we like it or not because the male brain will create it? (p. 121). In 2000, Gipps, McCallum, and Hargreaves expanded on Gurian?s (1996) findings. The researchers studied the ways in which teachers viewed the learning differences between boys and girls. Although the majority of the teacher subjects claimed there was no apparent learning difference between males and females, the researchers found three teachers who stated clearly that the reason they believed boys learned differently than girls was due to biological factors. One of these teachers stated, ?I suppose a lot of it has to do with stereotyping, but I also do believe that physiologically, intellectually?. they are actually different? (Gipps, McCallum, & Hargreaves, p. 113). However, Thorne (1993) found that there are as many differences within the same gender as there are between the two genders. Thorne observed various male and female children interactions in classrooms and on playgrounds. Although the research showed some differences between the genders, Thorne could not make any gender-specific deductions. In fact, the researcher found more variations within the same gender than between the two different ones. Thorne concluded, ?within-gender variation is greater than differences between boys and girls taken as groups? (p. 139). Pre-Service Teachers and Awareness of Gender The education of pre-service teachers and their awareness of gender equity in the classroom is another significant area that should be considered (Campbell & Sanders, 1997; Sadker, 1999; Sanders, 2000b). Sadker stated, ?Teacher education and staff development programs do little to prepare teachers to see the subtle, unintentional, but damaging gender bias that still characterizes classrooms? (p. 22). Sanders claimed that ?gender equity is in its infancy in teacher education? (p. 242). In 1997, Campbell and Sanders studied a national sample of 353 college-level methods instructors in mathematics, science, and technology. The researchers found ?while three-fourths of the respondents said they considered gender equity important, most taught it less than two hours a semester? (Sanders, p. 242). Zittleman and Sadker (as cited in Sanders) asserted that most of the gender equity education that pre-service teachers received happened in their teacher education courses. Sanders surmised, ?if students don?t learn about gender equity in teacher education, they probably won?t learn about it at all? (p. 243). There are efforts being made to incorporate more gender equity instruction into pre-service teacher education programs (Sanders, 1997, 2002b). Campbell and Sanders (1997) contended that pre-service teacher education does not provide enough attention to gender equity issues. In order to improve this condition, ?colleges, schools and departments of education must decide whether they believe that gender equity has a legitimate place in the curriculum of preservice teacher education? (Sanders, 2002b, p. 243). The researcher offered several suggestions that could ease this transition. First, Sanders (2002b) argued that gender equity must become systemic. Additionally, it must be on the agenda of the teacher education profession as well as the college or university that is schooling the pre-service teachers. Finally, teacher educators need a concise program of instruction as well as materials to establish a reliable means of teaching gender equity. Sanders warned, ?The silence on the topic must not continue? (2002b, p. 243). Gender and the Treatment of Students in Elementary School There are two main schools of thought in examining how the genders are treated in elementary schools. Some theorists (e. g., AAUW Educational Foundation, 1992; Thorne, 1993) contend that boys and girls are treated unequally. These researchers attribute gender inequity and stereotypes for many of the problems that both girls and boys face in present-day schools. On the other hand, other authors such as Dykes (2000) claim that gender inequity is not to blame for the inadequacies found in schools. In order to explain the problems in today?s schools, Dykes criticized the education system as a whole. Several studies have shown that girls and boys are treated differently in schools (AAUW Educational Foundation, 1992, 2000). In 1992, the AAUW Educational Foundation studied the common assumption that girls and boys are treated equally in our public schools. The foundation found that they are not treated equally. In fact, the study claimed that girls are shortchanged in many aspects of the national educational system. Additionally, Gilligan (as cited in Dykes, 2000) claimed that America?s girls are in crisis. The researcher argued that girls and boys developed differently, but that girls were not inferior to the boys. Dykes (2000) believed the notion that girls are shortchanged emerged from political propaganda disguised as science. Dykes claimed that the studies conducted by Gilligan and the 1992 AAUW report were not scientific. In fact, Dykes felt much of what the AAUW presented was a myth. The author believed there is not a boys? crisis or a girls? crisis, but rather an education crisis. The author suggested that policymakers should redirect their attention from studying gender myths to focusing on true education reforms. The Hidden Curriculum Although most schools have a standard written curriculum, some authors (e. g., Best, 1983; Owens, Smothers, & Love, 2003) suggest that there is also a hidden curriculum within these institutions. In the mid 1970?s, Best studied an elementary school located in the Central Atlantic region of the United States of America. At the conclusion of the examination, Best claimed there was more than one curriculum in schools. The author defined the first curriculum as the academic one that presents mathematics, reading, and writing. The second curriculum was classified as a gender-role socialization curriculum, which teaches children the traditional role behavior for the sexes. Owens, Smothers, and Love stated that what teachers say and do not say, their body language, what they do, and who they call upon form a hidden curriculum that is more powerful than any textbook lesson they could present. Best (1983) argued that the power of the teacher as well as the school had much influence over the manner in which the gender-role socialization curriculum was carried out. Gipps, McCallum, and Hargreaves (2000) found that teachers believed girls and boys had learned to act differently because of cultural stereotyping. This presumption can lead teachers to expect certain behaviors from females and males. One of the teachers in the examination pronounced, ?If we go on expecting boys to learn differently and expecting them to be more boisterous, then they live up to those expectations? (Gipps, McCallum, & Hargreaves, p. 114). Boys in the Feminine Elementary School Researchers (Kindlon & Thompson, 1999; Sadker & Sadker, 1994b) have found that some young boys have trouble adjusting to the elementary school atmosphere. Sadker and Sadker maintained that boys often have difficulty complying with the rules and regulations of the traditional elementary school. ?Raised to be active, aggressive, and independent, boys enter schools that seem to want them to be quiet, passive, and conforming? (Sadker & Sadker, p. 183). Kindlon and Thompson suggested the reason behind this problem develops from a combination of biology and society. The researchers asserted boys mature at a slower pace than girls. Additionally, ?boys are more active and slower to develop impulse control than girls? (Kindlon, & Thompson, p. 162). Although some boys will rise to the top of the class, Sadker and Sadker concluded that the aforementioned issues will cause some boys to land at the bottom. Furthermore, elementary schools have been characterized as feminine places where girls are largely ignored and rewarded for passive behavior (Kindlon & Thompson, 1999; Owens, Smothers, & Love, 2003; Sadker & Sadker, 1994a). In 1965, Patricia Sexton (as cited in Sadker & Sadker, 1994b) asserted, ?It is that school is too much a woman?s world, governed by women?s rules and standards. The school code is that of propriety, obedience, decorum, cleanliness, physical, and, too often, mental passivity? (p. 190). Owens, Smothers, and Love claimed that girls are rewarded for conforming to classroom rules by essentially being ignored by their teachers. Likewise, Kindlon and Thompson claimed, ?Grade school is largely a feminine environment, populated predominantly by women teachers and authority figures? (p. 155). Additionally, Sadker and Sadker (1994a) claimed that women who have spent years learning the lessons of silence in elementary classrooms have trouble regaining their voices later in life. Gender and Educational Technology Building on the concept that there are differences in the way the genders respond to educational experiences, several studies have examined the constructs of gender and educational technology (AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000; Dooling, 1999; Rice, 1999). Technology use in schools across the country has increased dramatically over the past several decades. Due to national mandates, computer technology has been improved and made available for most students. Many classrooms are now equipped with computers and Internet access as well as television monitors and additional technologies. These technological improvements have provided many students with opportunities to use and discover computer technology. The AAUW Educational Foundation affirmed, ?The question is no longer whether computers will be in the classrooms, but how computers can be used to enhance teaching and learning? (p. ix). Furthermore, the use of computer technology should provide equivalent learning experiences for both genders (AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000). The AAUW Educational Foundation?s commission reviewed existing research, talked with researchers, and listened to girls? and teachers? observations about computing. Based on their findings, the commission made several suggestions and recommendations to improve the quality of the computer culture for all learners. Some theorists (e. g., Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, & Hawkins, 1991; Brunner & Bennett, 1998) believe there are cultural and sociological reasons behind gender differences and technology. In essence, technology, gender, and society are interrelated and cannot be separated. Christie (1996) claimed, ?Technology does not exist in a vacuum; it exists only in social contexts, and as such, exists in a gendered world? (p. 2). Furthermore, Christie claimed that the vast majority of people assume that there is a gender gap in computer usage, computer competencies, computer attitudes, and computer profession choices. Christie (1996) considered the connection between gender and technology to be constructed within a culture and not inherently genetic. The researcher studied three groups of elementary school children to see how the children used and viewed technology, and how gender intersected with these experiences. After the researcher introduced the subjects to both e-mail and tools for browsing the Internet, the children were responsible for how they spent their time each day using the technology. Christie used interpretive methods called ?snapshots? to examine the subjects. They were asked to participate in e-mail interaction, daily journal writing, navigation logs, and newsletter creations. The researcher generated several assertions about the children, gender, and technology. Girls defined computers as tools that foster collaboration, connection, and communication, whereas boys defined computers as fun technologies for finding information and playing games. Girls centered around people while boys focused around events and things. Perception of Gender and Technology Likewise, Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, and Hawkins (1991) found that females and males perceive technology in distinct manners. The researchers studied the activity of design as a possible way to support alternative pathways for girls in to the world of technology. The study examined 24 adult technology experts, 41 girl adolescents, and 39 boy adolescents. Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, and Hawkins found that ?women commonly saw technological instruments as people connectors, communication, and collaboration devices. . . . The men, in contrast, tended to envision technology as extensions of their power over the physical universe? (p. 331). Correspondingly, Brunner and Bennett (1998) asserted that the feminine attitude towards technology focuses on its social function, while the masculine view concentrates on the machine itself. Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, and Hawkins concluded that girls view technology as embedded in human interaction whereas boys view technology as extensions of their power. Even though research shows that females and males differ in the ways they view technology, some scholars (e. g. AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000; Starr, 2000) question the assumption that females are less likely than males to be interested in technology. In the mid-1980?s, there was a movement that began doubting the notion that females were less likely to be drawn to computer careers than males (Christie, 1996). Even though statistics show that there are fewer females in computer laboratories and computer-related professions, Turkle (as cited in Starr) asserted that girls are not fearful of technology; they are simply uninspired and alienated by the way the K-12 education system presents computing to them. The AAUW Educational Foundation interprets the females? behavior not as a phobia, but rather as a choice. The AAUW Educational Foundation (2000) argued it is the computer culture that creates girls? disillusionment with technology. The computer culture refers to ?the social, psychological, educational, and philosophical meanings associated with information technology? (AAUW Educational Foundation , p. 7). McGrath (2004) explained, ?The AAUW Report found, not surprisingly, that girls do not like the computer game culture or the narrow and technical focus of computer science? (p. 29). Moreover, girls were more likely to take computer applications courses and generally disapproved of what they viewed as the machine focus that boys possessed. The AAUW Educational Foundation (2000) contended that women and men have equal capacity in the area of computing, but the women are less interested in getting involved. Females? limited involvement with computers has more to do with their disenchantment with technology rather than their phobias or intellectual deficiencies. Brunner and Bennett (1998) agreed with the AAUW report by explaining that girls are more ambivalent about technology than boys. Furthermore, the AAUW Educational Foundation claimed the girls in their studies expressed ?a ?we can, but don?t want to? philosophy? (p. 7). Research (e.g., Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, & Hawkins, 1991; Dooling, 1999) has shown that there are gender differences in certain computer technology attitudes and beliefs in elementary students. Dooling examined the beliefs that children in grades 4, 5, 6, and 7 hold regarding computer technology and the factors that influence those attitudes. The researcher studied 1427 students, 176 teachers, and 9 administrators in three elementary schools and three middle schools. Dooling found statistically significant gender differences, in favor of males, in self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs regarding computer technology as early as fourth grade. Social Interactions and Gender Bias Dooling (1999) found that both males and females learn a great deal about computer technology through social interactions with experienced adults and peers as well as through school experiences with technology. Moreover, gender stereotypes are often reinforced by parental examples using technology (AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000). Dooling noted that fathers played a large role in the social interactions of these subjects and technology. The AAUW Educational Foundation acknowledged, ?girls report that their fathers are more comfortable with computer technology than their mothers? (p. 52). Gender and Technology Behaviors Another factor in gender differences and technology use is related to the children?s behaviors in the classroom and at home (e. g., AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000; Christie, 1997). Siann, MacLeod, Glissov, and Durndell (as cited in Christie) claimed these behaviors begin in elementary schools where many boys tend to dominate computer use by crowding girls out. Boys are often more likely to be chosen than girls to assist the teachers with technology in the classroom (Sanders, as cited in Christie). Conversely, ?girls who behave aggressively in computer-rich settings risk becoming unpopular with boys and girls alike? (AAUW Educational Foundation, p. 25). Therefore, girls find acting passive is the safest and most rational manner in which to act. Parents? actions and reactions to the different genders can additionally affect the way students view technology (e. g., AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000; Christie, 1997) The AAUW Educational Foundation maintained that ?parents of boys are more likely to buy computers for them, place them in the boys? rooms, or enroll them in computer camps than parents of girls? (p. 52). Hess and Miura (as cited in Christie) concurred that boys were more likely than girls to participate in summer computer camps. Furthermore, these external technology experiences may be the reasons why boys come to school with more technological knowledge and thereby dominate the technological domain. The AAUW Educational Foundation (2000) made several suggestions to neutralize the gender bias related to technology. It suggested introducing technology at an early age to discourage stereotypes. Additionally, families should attempt to place the household computer in a gender-neutral area. The AAUW suggested placing the computer in an accessible place, but not in a male child?s room or the father?s office. The availability of the computer should encourage family-centered activities, rather than viewing the computer as an individual, solitary pursuit. Software Gender Bias and Selection Researchers have also studied the relationships between gender and the selection of software (e. g., AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000; Ferguson-Pabst, Persichitte, Lohr, & Pearman, 2003). The AAUW Educational Foundation contended that most computer games are designed for men by men, have subject matter of interest to boys, and are marketed towards males. Furthermore, many of the characters in today?s educational software are males. The AAUW Educational Foundation stated, ?A review of popular mathematics programs intended for grades kindergarten through six showed that only 12 percent of the gender-identifiable characters were female, and that these characters played passive traditional roles? (p. 29). The AAUW Educational Foundation suggested focusing on girls as software designers by encouraging them to imagine themselves early in life as producers of software and games, rather than just consumers or users of the software. On the other hand, Ferguson-Pabst, Persichitte, Lohr, and Pearman (2003) claimed that gender does not affect the software selection process of elementary students. The researchers studied software selection by gender, grade level, and teacher variables. The researchers examined 202 third, fourth, and fifth grade students in a single elementary school in Colorado. Individual students were presented with four pieces of mathematical software, and allowed to choose their preference. Ferguson-Pabst, Persichitte, Lohr, and Pearman found ?few significant differences for gender and grade level selection of software? (p. 19). Additionally, the study revealed that the individual teacher often plays a significant role in student?s software choices. Ferguson-Pabst, Persichitte, Lohr, and Pearman suggested conducting further research in the area of teacher attitudes and methods relating to computers, software, and technology. Gender and Technology Stereotypes Unconscious stereotyping can often play a role in perpetuating the gender inequity in technology education (Harding, as cited in Sanders & Tescione, 2002). In 2000, the Northwest Educational Technology Consortium (as cited in Sanders & Tescione) defined several of these abovementioned stereotypes. First, teachers often assume boys are more interested in computers than are girls. Likewise, they presume girls do not like programming or are not interested in computers. Honey, Moeller, Brunner, Bennett, Clements, and Hawkins (1991) claimed that from a very early age, boys are expected and encouraged by their teachers to learn about machines, tools, and other technologies. On the other hand, many teachers do not expect girls to be familiar with technical matters. Sanders and Tescione alleged, ?Teachers with these attitudes subtly transmit them to girls? (p. 104). Research has shown that stereotyping may be correlated to the teacher?s gender (AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000). When asked who is more interested in the mechanics of computer technology, the AAUW Educational Foundation found that 71 percent of male teachers chose male students and only one percent of male teachers chose female students. In contrast, 66 percent of the female teachers in the study found male and female students about equal in ability to use the technology. Moreover, male teachers were more likely to describe their female students in passive and disinterested terms, while female teachers viewed girl students as more competent. Gender stereotyping is often maintained through certain teacher behaviors (Rice, 1995). Armitage (as cited in Rice) described several of these behaviors. They included calling on boys more than girls, accepting boys? answers more than girls? answers, asking boys more interpretative questions and girls more factual ones, positioning their bodies toward boys more than girls, circulating more to boys? desks than to girls? desks, and telling boys how to solve problems while solving the problems for the girls. Sadker and Sadker (1994a) found ?that boys call out eight times more often than girls? (p. 43). Moreover, Sanders (as cited in Christie, 1997) contended that many girls feel that the computer lab is off limits to them, and is primarily a place for boys and men. The AAUW Educational Foundation (2000) explained that these behaviors can promote gender bias in technology education. Gender and Teacher Training Teachers may require more inservice training in order to manage many of these gender issues (Sanders, 2002a, 2002b). In a study conducted in 1993, a team of 22 teachers, administrators, science educators, and faculty members met to discuss the role of technology in the River Grove Elementary School in Lake Oswego, Oregon (Rice, 1995). The study identified many problems such as the lack of teacher confidence in women teachers teaching math, science, and technology. Additionally, Rice recommended several strategies to address gender inequities in the classroom. Four of the teachers who were recently provided with new technology in their classrooms were interviewed. The interviewed teachers revealed a strong desire for inservice resources and resource personnel to support their use of technology in their classrooms. Additionally, the teachers agreed that it would be important to include gender equity issues in the content of the inservice training sessions. Research has also been conducted regarding teacher education in gender equity and technology (Sanders, 2002a). As was previously discussed, institutions of education must decide whether gender equity has a valid position in the instruction of preservice teacher education programs. Once these institutions acknowledge the need for gender equity education in the preparation of future teachers, there are several points they should follow. Sanders suggested viewing gender equity as universal and not isolated. Also, teachers and teacher educators ?need a concise program of instruction and materials to jumpstart their new expertise, and a way must be found to give it to them? (p. 243). Finally, the gender equity issue needs to be on the agenda of more teacher education programs. Suggestions for Improvement In order to improve the gender inequity, specifically in technology education, researchers (AAUW Educational Foundation, 2000) have also made suggestions. The AAUW Educational Foundation is currently involved in a research agenda that includes a focus on girls? and young women?s educational preparation for the technological, information-driven economy. The AAUW Educational Foundation defined what it would mean to achieve gender equity in the computer culture. It developed two main schools of thought. Some researchers suggested getting ?more girls into the ?pipeline? to computer-related careers and to participate in these disciplines and pursuits? (AAUW Educational Foundation, p. 3). The other school of thought proposed that the computer culture itself be transformed through the integration of girls? and women?s insights. The AAUW Educational Foundation considered these two views as complimentary of one another. Conclusion In light of the research conducted in this literature review, it is safe to assume that there are various correlations between the constructs of gender, elementary students, and technology. Although there are certainly conflicting and differing views surrounding the issues of gender and technology, this preliminary review should serve several purposes. First, the findings of this review may prove helpful to educators, administrators and researchers interested in examining technology integration in elementary schools. The researcher found many informational studies, past findings, and pieces of literature related to the topics. Furthermore, the researcher determined that there is not a simple answer as to how the constructs are related. In fact, there are many interpretations and analyses surrounding the issues. Moreover, the review of the literature provided several ideas and recommendations for future studies related to gender and technology. Maybe one day the boys and girls in the classroom that Sadker and Sadker (1994) described will be ?sitting in the same classroom, reading the same textbook, listening to the same teacher? (p. 4), and receiving similar educations. References American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (1992). How schools shortchange girls: A study of major findings on girls and education. Washington, D. C.: Author and National Education Association. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new computer age. Washington, D. C.: Author. Retrieved March 13, 2004, from http://www.aauw.org/member_center/publications/TechSavvy/TechSavvy.pdf Best, R. (1983). We?ve all got scars: What boys and girls learn in elementary school. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Brunner, C., & Bennett, D. (1998). Technology perceptions by gender. The Education Digest, 63(1), 56-58. Campbell, P. B., & Sanders, J. S. (1997). Uninformed but interested: Findings of the national survey on gender equity in preservice education. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 69-75. Christie, A. A. (1996). Using email within a classroom based on feminist pedagogy. Retrieved March 6, 2004, from http://www.iste.org/jrte/28/5/christie/artivcle/textonly.cfm Christie, A. A. (1997). Using email to diffuse gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Retrieved March 5, 2004, from http://www.west.asu.edu/achristie/TelEd97/gender.htm Dooling, J. O. (1999). A study of gender differences in beliefs toward computer technology and factors which influence these beliefs in grades 4, 5, 6, and 7. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(06), 430. (UMI No. 9936826) Dykes, L. (2000). Gilligan?s island: Gender myths and public policy. The Contrarian, 4(13). Retrieved April 14, 2004, from http://www.pacificresearch.org/pub/con/2000/00-08-11.html Ferguson-Pabst, D., Persichette, K., Lohr, L., & Pearman, B. (2003). An analysis of the influence of gender, grade level, and teacher on the selection of mathematics software by intermediate students. Information Technology in Childhood Education, 5-27. Gall, J. P., Gall, M. D., & Borg, W. R. (1999). Applying educational research (4th ed.). New York: Longman. Galvan, J. L. (1999). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences. Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczak. Gipps, C., McCallum, B., & Hargreaves, E. (2000). What makes a good primary school teacher: Expert classroom strategies. New York: RoutledgeFalmer. Honey, M., Moeller, B., Brunner, C., Bennett, D., Clements, P., & Hawkins, J. (1991). Girls and design: Exploring the questions of technological imagination. In E. Rassen & L. Iura (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (p. 329-344). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Johns Hopkins Medical Institute. (2000). Hopkins research shows nature, not nurture, determines gender. Retrieved April 14, 2004, from http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/press/2000/MAY/000512.HTM Kindlon, D., & Thompson, M. (1999). Thorns among roses: The struggle of young boys in early education. In E. Rassen & L. Iura (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (p. 153-181). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. McGrath, D. (2004). Closing the gender gap: Girls, technology, fluency, and PBL. Learning and Leading with Technology, 31(6), 28-31. Owens, S. L., Smothers, B. C., & Love, F. E. (2003). Are girls victims of gender bias in our nation?s schools? Journal of Instructional Technology, 30(2). Retrieved March 22, 2004, from http://www.questia.com Pollack, W. (1998). Real boys: The truth behind the myths. In E. Rassen & L. Iura (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (p. 88-100). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Rice, M. (1995). Issues surrounding the integration of technology into the K-12 classroom: Notes from the field. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 3(1), 67-81. Retrieved March 14, 2004, from http://www.helsinki.fi/science/optek//1995/n1/rice.txt Sadker, D. (1999). Gender equity: Still knocking at the classroom door. Educational Leadership, 56(7), 22-26. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994a). Failing at fairness: How America?s schools cheat girls. New York: Macmillan Publishing. Sadker, D., & Sadker, M.(1994b). The miseducation of boys. In E. Rassen & L. Iura (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (p. 182-203). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sanders, J. (1997). Teacher education and gender equity (Report No. RR93002015). Washington, D. C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED408277) Sanders, J. (2002a). Fairness at the source. Retrieved April 1, 2004, from http://www.josanders.com/pdf/Fairness_122702.pdf Sanders, J. (2002b). Something is missing from teacher education: Attention to two genders. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(3), 241-244. Sanders, J. (2003). Teaching gender equity in teacher education. Education Digest, 68(5), 25-29. Sanders, J., & Tescione, S. M. (2002). Gender equity and technology. In J. Koch & B. Irby (Eds.), Defining and redefining gender equity in education (p. 99-115). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Shapiro, J., Kramer, S., & Hunerberg, C. (1981). Equal their chances: Children?s activities for non-sexist learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Starr, L. (2000). An education world e-interview with Sherry Turkle: Is technology just for boys? Retrieved March 23, 2004, from http://content.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr228.shtml Sprinthall, N. A., Sprinthall, R. C., & Oja, S. N. (1994). Educational psychology: A developmental approach (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Thorne, B. (1993). Do boys and girls have different cultures? In E. Rassen & L. Iura (Eds.), The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (p. 125-150). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Login or register to post comments

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies

• For Readers
• For Authors
• For Librarians

• Announcements
• SUBMISSIONS
• FOCUS and SCOPE
• EDITORIAL TEAM
• ADVISORY BOARD
• SPECIAL ISSUE

A Descriptive Literature Review: Scrutinizing Gender Sensitisation In Education Sector

Abrahams, F. F., & Sommerkorn, N. I. (1995). Promoting Gender Awareness in the Classroom: An

Example from Germany. Wilfried Bos, Rainer H. Lehmann (éd.), Reflections on Educational

Achievement–Papers in Honour of T. Neville Postlethwaite., 8-24.

Alba, R. J. (2019). Attitude towards gender equality and coeducation among Secondary School teachers: a

case study in Madrid, Spain. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 19(13), 491-508.

Anita, A., Nargis, A., & Yasmin, S. (2010). Gender in Academic Settings: Role of Teachers. International

journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 1(4), 343-348.

Annetta, A. L., Slykhuis, D., & Wiebe, E. (2007). Evaluating Gender Differences of Attitude and Perception

Towards Powerpoint for Pre service science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science, &

Technology Education, 3(4), 297-304.

Ara, N., & Malik, K. S. (2012). Gender Discrimination in Education- A barrier in Development of Female

Education at Higher Secondary Level. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business,

(5), 330-339.

Barodia, S. (2015). Gender Sensitization and Education. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and

Multidisciplinary Studies, 2(4), 107-113.

Baviskar, S. G. (2016). Role of Teacher in Gender Sensitivity. International Journal of Social Science &

Scientific Research, 02(1).

Dr. Divya Kalra / Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(2), 1316-1327; 2021

© 2021 JLLS and the Authors - Published by JLLS.

Bhattacharya. (2017). Gender Representation in English Textbooks used in Grade Eight under National and

State Boards, India. Language in India, 17(6), 410-432.

Chaven, P. (2016). Gender Sensitisation Strategies In Education. International Journal of Social Science &

Scientific Research, 02(1), 47-51.

Cheag, S. G., & Yuen, W. C. (2016). A Review of Research on Child Abuse in Malaysia. Medical journal

of Malaysia, 71(1), 87-99.

Dash, H. K., KrIshna, S., & Sadangi, B. (2008). Gender Sensitization: Role in Reforming the society.

National Research Centre for Women in Agriculture.

Dawar, T., & Anand, S. (2017). Analysis of Primary Level textbooks from Gender Lens. 3(1), 115-118.

Deore, V. K. (2016). Awareness of Gender Sensitization Through Education. International Journal of Social

Science & Scientific Research, 02(1), 81-86.

Deshmukh, D. S. (2016). Gender, Gender Sensitisation And Eduaction. International Journal of Social

Science & Scientific Research, 02(1), 33-36.

Erden, T. F. (2009). A Course on Gender Equity in education: Does it affect gender role attitudes of preservice teachers? Teacher and Teacher Education, 409-414.

Esteves, M. (2018). GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION: A CHALLENGE FOR POLICY MAKERS.

International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(2), 893-905.

Frawley, T. (2005). Gender Bias in the Classroom. Journal of Childhood Education, 81(4).

Ghatvisave, S. (2016). To Study the perception level of Pre-Service Secondary Teachers towards Gender

Sensitivity. International Journal of Social & Scientific Research, 2, 22-24.

Gibson, E. L., & Leitenberg, H. (2000). CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE PREVENTION PROGRAMS: DO

THEY DECREASE THE OCCURRENCE OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE? Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(9),

Gul, S., Khan, B. M., Mughal, S., Rehman, U. S., & Saif, N. (2012). Gender Stereotype and Teachers

Perceptions (The Case of Pakistan). Information and Knowledge Management, 2(7), 17-28.

Gure, S. G. (2016). GENDER SENSITISATION: SIGNIFICANCE OF EDUCATION. International

Educational & Research Journal, 2(12), 117-119.

Ifegbesan, A. (2010). Gender Stereotyp: The Nigerian Post- Primary School Teacherse Belief and practices

in the classroom. Global Journal of Human Science, 10(4), 29-35.

Jackson, Emerson & Jackson, Judith. (2020). Global Perspectives on Gender Sensitivity and Economic

Benefits. 10.1007/978-3-319-70060-1_61-1.

Kale, P. (2016). A Study of the English Textbook in Relation to Gender Sensitivity. International Journal

of Social & Scientific Research, 02(1), 43-46.

Kenny, C. M. (2001). Child Abuse Reporting: Teachers Perceived Deterrents. Child abuse & neglect 25,

(1), 81-92.

Dr. Divya Kalra / Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(2), 1316-1327; 2021 1326

Kesici, S. (2008). Democratic Teacher Beliefs according to the Teachers Gender and Locus of control.

Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(1), 62-69.

Kumar, A., Pathak, A., Kumar, S., Rastogi, P., & Rastogi, P. (2012). The Problem of Child Sexual Abuse

in India Laws, Legal Lacuna and the Bill- PCSOB- 2011. J Indian Axad Forensic Med, 34(2), 170-175.

Kumar, N. (2016). Strategies for Gender Sensitisation at Work Place. International Journal of Social &

Scientific Research, 2(1), 67-70.

Kumar, R. (2013). The Role of Education Sector in Removing Gender Inequality.

Kute, P. M. (2016). Role of Education in Gender Sensitivity. International Journal of Social & Scientific

Research, 2, 10-11.

Lumadi, W. M., & Shongwe, S. S. (2010). The Need for Training Gender Sensitive Teachers: Adressing

Education Challenges for Gender sensitive National Development. Contemporary issues in Education

Research, 3(3), 41-49.

Marshall, S. C., & Reinhartz, J. (2012). Gender Issues in the Classroom. A Journal of Educational Strategies

, Issuesand Ideas, 7o(6), 333-337.

Meyer, J. E. (2008). Gendered Harassment in secondary Schools; Understanding Teachers (non)

interventions. Gender and Education, 20(6), 555-570.

Mittal, R., & Kaur, J. (2019). Gender Sensitization for Women Empowerment: A Review. Indian Journal

of Economics and Development, 15(1).

Naraynrao, A. S., & Gingine, A. (2016). Role of Teacher in Gender Sensitivity. International Journal of

Social Science & Scientific Research, 02(1), 12-16.

Nayak, K. R. (2014). Gender Sensitization and Role of Education: An Introspection.

Obiunu, J. J. (2013). The Effect of Gender Sensitivity on Discrimination among Secondary School Students.

Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 4(6), 888-894.

Panigrahi, S. B. (2016). Eliminating Gender Discrimination In Academic Settings : The Influence of

Teachers. International Journal of Social Science & Scientific Research, 02(1), 57-61.

Patel, A. S., & Shaikh, A. M. (2016). Gender Sensitisation in the school and strategies for improvement.

International Journal of Social & Scientific Research, 2(1), 87-90.

Raina, S. (2012). Gender Bias in Education. International Journal of Research Pedagogy and Technology

in Education, 1(2), 37-47.

Ranganath, S., Rao, A. K., & Srinivas, N. (2011). Gender Equality in Education. International Journal of

Multidisciplinart Research, 1(6), 325-332.

Sadker, D., & Zittleman, K. R. (2007). Teachers, Schools and Society: A brief Introduction to Education.

Sebastian, V. (2016). Role Of Teachers In Gender Sensitivity: Perception of B.Ed. Students Related To

Gender Roles In Society. International Journal of Social Science & Scientific Research, 02(1), 76-80.

Sharma, B. (2016). An Attempt of Gender Sensitizing through Analysis of School Textbook. Imperial

Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 2(9), 511-515.

Sharma, R. (2017). Gen der Sensitization: An Appraisal of the Roles of Teachers and Educational

Institutions. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Intervention, 6(6), 38-40.

Shukla, S. (2016). Our Primary Level Textbooks and Social Constructs about Gender. An International,

Open Access, Peer Reviewed, Refereed E -Journal in English, 2(1), 93-101.

Tatar, M., & Emmanuel, G. (2001). Teachers Perceptions of their Students Gender Roles. The Journal of

Educational Research, 94(4), 215-224.

Thomas, S. (2016). Women Empoernment and Gender Sensitivity. International Journal of Social Science

& Scientific Research, 02(1), 118-121.

Thosare, T. A. (2016). Gender Inequality & Reasons: Need for Gender Sensitive Approaches. International

Journal of Social & Scientific Research, 52-55

• There are currently no refbacks.