Unpublished papers available (updated September, 2007):
Patricia A. Roos, and Mary L. Gatta, 2007, "Gender (In)Equity in the Academy: Subtle Mechanisms Reproducing Inequality." Revised version of a paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, Montreal, August, 2006.
Researchers have shifted in recent years from explanations that posit overt discrimination as the causal mechanism reproducing gender inequity, to more subtle forms of favoritism and/or barriers to advancement. Working in the latter tradition, we focus on how subtle sex biases reproduce inequality in academia, through nonconscious beliefs and attitudes that operate through workplace interactions, and through the use of subjective policies and procedures institutionalized in the academic workplace. We examine these issues with qualitative and quantitative data from an Arts & Sciences (A&S) unit of a public research university. We use our quantitative data to assess the extent to which unequal outcomes persist in the academic workplace, and our qualitative data to flesh out the mechanisms whereby those unequal outcomes are reproduced.
For a copy: Patricia Roos
Patricia A. Roos, and Michelle Meng Bai, 2007, "Work-Family Realities: Race, Class, and Gender Differences in Work Behaviors and Attitudes." Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Sociological Association, New York, August, 2007.
Much of the resurgence of interest in work-family issues in recent years has centered around the behaviors and attitudes of middle- to upper-class white women. Too little attention has been focused on race and class differences in how women integrate work and family in their own lives, or in their work-family attitudes. This is unfortunate because, as past research suggests, the work-family experiences of black women in particular may well be a harbinger of things to come for other women. This is all the more true in the newly restructuring economy where “choice” to work is no longer an option for most women. In this paper, we use recent data from the General Social Survey to examine race, class, and gender variation in both work choices and work-family attitudes. We focus on race and class differences among women in five race groups, including whites, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and other races. We provide data for men for comparison purposes. Broadening our focus to variation among women helps to clarify their responses to new work-family realities.
For a copy: Patricia Roos