Slide 5: sometimes, research shows, we see the opposite of "paying it forward"
There is some evidence that some women who have made it do not pay forward; rather, they are harder on and tend to derogate other women.
This phenomenon has been the focus of research and has been dubbed...
Bees
Queen bee
Slide 6: the "queen bee phenomenon"
Stain, Tavris, and Jayaratne (1974) coined the term to describe a tendency for women to oppose the progress of other women in an attempt to subvert their success and eliminate competition for limited male attention.
Women may be more likely than men to discriminate against women.
Women see each other as rivals more than do men.
Ellemers (2004): "The queen-bee syndrome tends to affect older faculty members who carved out successful academic careers at a time when this was still an exceptional route for a woman. They may be inclined to fight the rise of other women through the academic "hive" to preserve their hard-won position. Queen bees identify themselves as predominantly masculine and set themselves apart from other women, the research says."
Slide 7: "queen bee" relevant research
Broder (1993). In looking at reviews of NSF Economics proposals, female reviewers rated female-authored papers lower than they rated male-authored papers. The result still holds when controlling for institutional affiliation and experience of reviewer.
Garcia-Retamero and Lopez-Zafra (2006). Women (but not men) rated a female candidate (with the exact same qualifications) as less qualified than the male candidate.
Cooper (1997). Traditional women evaluate women as leaders significantly worse than do nontraditional women.
Ellemers (2004). Female scientists believe their junior female colleagues do less work and are less committed to their careers than men, despite the fact that these women produce as much as do men.
Toder (1980). Women evaluated women more negatively when men were present than when group was all women.
Mathison (1986). Female managers were more critical than assertive female employees than were male managers.
Graves and Powell (1995). Female interviewers had more reservations about hiring female applicants than did male interviewers.
Ellemers (2001). Women were more likely to hold gender-stereotypical views of their female colleagues than were men.
Hebl, King, and Davies (2007). Women were more likely to derogate other women if they were threatened with a lowered self-esteem manipulation.
Slide 8: the "queen bee phenomenon" is more likely to occur when:
women are evaluating people of lower status.
women are social tokens or very underrepresented.
women are threatened, have low self-esteem, or are insecure.
women hold very stereotypical views about what
is appropriate for women.
Experiences?
Slide 9: becoming aware of the "queen bee phenomenon" can not only prevent its occurrence but can also trigger more actions of "paying it forward"
This is not to suggest that women give preferential treatment to other women; just that women are mindful of the many ways that they can avoid derogating and that they can encourage other women.
Slide 10: what are your experiences with "paying it forward"?
Share 1 - 3 experiences you have had with Paying It Forward, either as an initiator or beneficiary...
Slide 11: what would "paying it forward" look like in academia?
Within the Rice STEM community?
Within in the overall STEM community?
For you personally?
As the Pay It Forward initiator?
As the Pay It Forward beneficiary?
Slide 12: concluding points
It will benefit women in STEM as a whole to "pay it forward" to other women.
The "Queen Bee" phenomenon has very detrimental effects to women as a whole.
Increased distributions of women into male-dominated societal positions/workforces may reduce the "Queen Bee" phenomenon.
As pioneering women have paid it forward for us, we have an obligation to pay it forward to future generations of women.
Slide 13: final conclusion
Pay it Forward!
Pay it forward
Slide 14: the absence of women in stem via eagly (1987) social role theory
Eagly's social role theory
Slide 15: how eagly (1987) social role theory can explain the "queen bee phenomenon"
Eagly's social role theory
Slide 16: why critical mass is important
Eagly's social role theory
Slide 17: "paying it forward" in academia
What's the difference between "Paying It Forward" and...
Good Mentoring?
Being a Good Friend/Colleague?
Possible "Pitfalls" of Women "Paying in Forward"
Promotes stereotypical "female" behavior?
Indirectly "blames" women for gender discrimination?
