A collective action approach to improving attitudes and self-efficacy towards gender equality among male STEM academics

Despite the implementation of equality interventions within higher education, progress towards gender parity in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) remains slow. Male educators often exhibit poorer engagement with diversity initiatives, potentially contributing to persisting gender disparities in STEM given men’s longstanding dominance in these programs. Two experiments investigate how equality interventions should be designed to maximize support from male educators. Experiment 1 (N = 72; Mage = 39.72, SDage = 12.33) used virtual reality to manipulate 2 factors among male academics: (1) exposure to gender inequality and (2) virtually taking the perspective of a female scientist. Using self-report and behavioral measures, viewing an empirical presentation outlining the prevalence of gender issues in STEM yielded the greatest support for equality initiatives following successful perspective-taking. Experiment 2 (N = 120; Mage = 32.48, SDage = 10.36) varied two additional factors among male academics: (1) evidence-based methods to reduce gender biases in STEM (i.e., promoting self-efficacy) and (2) blaming male academics for gender inequalities. Promoting self-efficacy and blaming men for disparities led to greater confidence in male academics’ ability to address gender inequalities in their field. Notably, higher self-efficacy accounted for greater support for equality initiatives and internal motives to engage with diversity programs. Findings provide an empirical framework and high-tech training tools for promoting engagement with diversity initiatives among male educators, informing development of interventions within higher education to improve student and faculty experiences in STEM

The politics of heroes through the prism of popular heroism

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Palgrave Macmillan via the DOI in this record.In modern day Britain, the discourse of national heroification is routinely utilised by politicians, educationalists and cultural industry professionals, whilst also being a popular concept to describe deserving ‘do-gooders’ who contribute to British society in a myriad of ways. We argue that although this heroification discourse is enacted as a discursive device of encouraging politically and morally desirable behaviour, it is dissociated from the largely under-explored facets of contemporary popular heroism. To compensate for this gap, this paper explores public preferences for heroes using survey data representative of British adults. This analysis demonstrates a conceptual stretching in the understanding of heroism, and allows identifying age- and gender-linked dynamics which effect public choices of heroes. In particular, we demonstrate that age above all determines the preference for having a hero, but does not explain preferences for specific hero-types. The focus on gender illustrates that the landscape of popular heroism reproduces a male-dominated bias which exists in the wider political and cultural heroification discourse. Simultaneously, our study shows that if national heroification discourse in Britain remains male-centric, the landscape of popular heroism is characterised by a gendered trend towards privatisation of heroes being particularly prominent amongst women. In the conclusion, this paper argues for a conceptual revision and re-gendering of the national heroification discourse as a step towards both empirically grounded, and age- and gender-sensitive politics of heroes and heroines.AHR