Tessa Benson-Greenwald is a doctoral candidate in social psychology. Last fall, she announced on Twitter that a paper, which she had co-written with two other female researchers, had been published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. The topic was focused on how the number of women in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) subdisciplines influences whether the field is categorized as a soft vs. a hard science.
"Ah! Our new paper is out in JESP! How do people decide whether a science is a "hard science" or a "soft science"? We explore how women's numerical representation in STEM subdisciplines influences whether the field is categorized as a soft vs. hard science," Benson-Greenwald tweeted.
Ah! Our new paper is out in JESP! How do people decide whether a science is a "hard science" or a "soft science"? We explore how women's numerical representation in STEM subdisciplines influences whether the field is categorized as a soft vs. hard science. https://t.co/cmimclgVgi
— Tessa Benson-Greenwald (@GreenwaldTessa) October 26, 2021
The paper, "Gender representation cues labels of hard and soft sciences" was published in the January 2022 edition of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. The authors are Amanda B. Diekman, Alysson E. Light, and Tessa Benson-Greenwald. The three researchers are from the Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of the Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
According to the abstract, Study 1 found that increasing perceived participation of women in a STEM discipline increased the likelihood that participants would label it a soft science. Study 2 found that among people who did not work in science, this tendency to associate women's participation with soft science was correlated with endorsement of stereotypes about women's STEM competency. And Studies 3A and 3B showed that labeling disciplines as soft sciences led to the fields being devalued, deemed less rigorous, and less worthy of federal funding.
These studies show that stereotypes about women's STEM competency can impact perceptions of fields in which women participate, with consequences for how scientific disciplines are perceived.
