As the numbers of women working in certain areas of medicine – such as general practice and primary care – continues to grow, they remain under-represented in other medical fields – like surgical specialties. This study examines whether medical professionals mistakenly infer that women are now broadly well represented, overestimating women’s true representation in several different areas and roles; and how this overestimation influences their support for gender equality initiatives.
By: Christopher Begeny, Rebecca Grossman and Michelle Ryan
Posted on 21 March 2022
Key findings
Paralleling trends in other countries, in the UK women now make up over half of all medical school graduates. However, recruitment of female doctors to several specialty areas is not keeping pace with their recruitment to medicine in general. For instance, women are well represented in general practice/primary care, yet remain under-represented in medical and surgical specialties (eg, in surgical specialties, less than 15% of consultants are women).
Despite women’s continuing under-representation in several areas of medicine (including some of the highest paying and most prestigious areas), their more prominent representation in general practice and medical schools may be prompting some in the field to mistakenly infer that women are now well represented across the board or better represented than they actually are in several areas. This is important to consider, partly because if individuals overestimate women’s representation they may be less willing to support policies and initiatives that aim to further promote gender equality in the profession. They may regard them as no longer necessary, for instance.
Indeed, previous research on this topic, although limited in scope, demonstrates that when individuals overestimate women’s representation in a field (eg, in STEMM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine) and in politics), they show less support for initiatives that aim to help women in those fields. Thus, medical professionals who overestimate the true progress that has been made in women’s representation in the field may be at highest risk of undermining it.
Our research finds that medical professionals tend to overestimate women’s true representation in several different areas of medicine (general practice, medical specialties, surgical specialties) and in various roles (consultants/general practitioners, trainees, medical school graduates). Moreover, these erroneous estimates predicted a decreased willingness to support gender-based initiatives, particularly among men in the field. Specifically, while female respondents’ (over)estimates were unrelated to their level of support, male respondents’ tendency to overestimate the proportion of women in medicine predicted lower support for gender-based initiatives.
While some progress has been made in gender representation in the medical field, this research illustrates that there are still barriers to gender equality efforts and identifies who within the field is focally maintaining these barriers. It is those individuals (particularly men) who overestimate the true progress that has been made in women’s representation who are at highest risk of undermining it.
Contact
You may also like
01
Jul
Addressing work-related gendered violence against Victorian healthcare workers
Work-related gendered violence is pervasive in the Victorian healthcare sector and harms employees’ physical and mental wellbeing, financial and work outcomes, the quality of care provided, and the healthcare sector as a whole. We are working with The Health and Community Services Union (HACSU) as research partners on their project, to understand the current state of work-related gendered violence in the sector, bring together the available evidence and offer evidence-based solutions to this systemic issue.
12
Jul
Recognising subtle forms of workplace discrimination
Blatant acts of sexism are no longer tolerated in most workplaces, but that doesn’t mean that sexism has disappeared. Although most employees have experienced or witnessed workplace incivility, those experiences are more frequent among women and racial minorities. 'Selective incivility' (i.e., microaggressions directed toward marginalized groups) is the new, more subtle form of prejudice that is difficult to formally censor because the behavior is often ambiguous, and it is nearly impossible to prove discriminatory intent. New research with Professor Michelle Ryan and collaborators shows that our identity (who we are) shapes our reactions to these ambiguous situations in our workplace (how we see things). In fact, it even affects our perceptions of discrimination. Specifically, when we highly identify with our workplace—a sense of attachment that ordinarily offers benefits for employee motivation and engagement—it can also hinder our ability to recognize mistreatment when it occurs.
30
Jan
Why we need to stop trying to "fix" women
To address the persistence of gender inequalities, many workplace gender equality interventions have been designed and implemented by governments, gender equality practitioners, professional bodies, and organisations. In this review article we provide a critical appraisal of the literature to establish an evidence base for why "fixing" women is unlikely to be a successful approach to achieving gender equality in career trajectories.