I think the continuing lack of women in higher positions in academia and industry is pretty compelling evidence of this.
I actually disagree with this. I agree that the under-representation is a result of a cultural bias, but I believe it's a bias that the population at large has about science -- especially "hard" sciences like physics -- not a bias within science. On average, the fraction of graduate, postdoc and faculty positions offered to people of under-represented groups, especially women, is equal to or greater than the fraction of applicants.* The problem is that there are very few women and minority applicants, which I think stems from a culture that discourages people in those groups from pursuing science at a young age.
I overstated my original claim for the sake of simplicity, although I stand by my main point: you were selected for the panel because you deserved it, not so that you could check the diversity box. I don't think many scientists would even think about checking a diversity box, which one could probably argue as evidence for either blindness or bias. However, I do strongly believe that the real problem with recruitment of women and minorities into the sciences results more from prevalent cultures attitudes about science than from biases or practices among scientists.
*Data from select (top-tier) universities who contributed to an internal study my graduate school physics department performed regarding diversity - a small but not trivial sample size.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-06-03 03:09 am (UTC)I actually disagree with this. I agree that the under-representation is a result of a cultural bias, but I believe it's a bias that the population at large has about science -- especially "hard" sciences like physics -- not a bias within science. On average, the fraction of graduate, postdoc and faculty positions offered to people of under-represented groups, especially women, is equal to or greater than the fraction of applicants.* The problem is that there are very few women and minority applicants, which I think stems from a culture that discourages people in those groups from pursuing science at a young age.
I overstated my original claim for the sake of simplicity, although I stand by my main point: you were selected for the panel because you deserved it, not so that you could check the diversity box. I don't think many scientists would even think about checking a diversity box, which one could probably argue as evidence for either blindness or bias. However, I do strongly believe that the real problem with recruitment of women and minorities into the sciences results more from prevalent cultures attitudes about science than from biases or practices among scientists.
*Data from select (top-tier) universities who contributed to an internal study my graduate school physics department performed regarding diversity - a small but not trivial sample size.