Gender-Based Linguistic Analysis of Pediatric Clinical Faculty Evaluations.
gender equity
teaching evaluations
women in medicine
Journal
Academic pediatrics
ISSN: 1876-2867
Titre abrégé: Acad Pediatr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101499145
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2022
03 2022
Historique:
received:
26
07
2021
revised:
02
12
2021
accepted:
09
12
2021
pubmed:
20
12
2021
medline:
23
4
2022
entrez:
19
12
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Gendered stereotypes are embedded in the culture of medicine. Women are stereotypically expected to act collaboratively and less assertively, while men are expected to act with authority and power. Whether gender-biased language is expressed in academic pediatric teaching evaluations is unknown. Determine whether stereotypic gender-based linguistic differences exist in resident evaluations of pediatric faculty. We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of clinical faculty evaluations by pediatric residents in a single program from July 2016 to June 2019. Using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count, responses to 2 open-ended questions were analyzed for stereotypic language. Categories were reported as a percent of total words written. Comparisons between gender groups were conducted using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Rates of word use within each category were analyzed using logistic regression where faculty and resident gender were included as predictor variables. A total of 6436 free-text responses from 3218 unique evaluations were included. As hypothesized, evaluations of women faculty were less likely than those of men to include certain agentic language like power (odds ratio [OR] 0.9, P < .001) and insight (OR 0.9, P < .001), and research words (OR 0.6, P = .003). As expected, evaluations of women were more likely to include grindstone words, like "hardworking" (OR 1.2, P = .012). Contrary to our hypothesis, women received fewer teaching words like "mentor" (OR 0.9, P = .048) and communal words like "friendly" (OR 0.6, P = .001). Certain stereotypic language was demonstrated in clinical teaching evaluations of pediatric faculty. These findings should be further examined to improve gender inequities in academic pediatrics.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Gendered stereotypes are embedded in the culture of medicine. Women are stereotypically expected to act collaboratively and less assertively, while men are expected to act with authority and power. Whether gender-biased language is expressed in academic pediatric teaching evaluations is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
Determine whether stereotypic gender-based linguistic differences exist in resident evaluations of pediatric faculty.
METHODS
We performed a retrospective cross-sectional study of clinical faculty evaluations by pediatric residents in a single program from July 2016 to June 2019. Using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count, responses to 2 open-ended questions were analyzed for stereotypic language. Categories were reported as a percent of total words written. Comparisons between gender groups were conducted using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Rates of word use within each category were analyzed using logistic regression where faculty and resident gender were included as predictor variables.
RESULTS
A total of 6436 free-text responses from 3218 unique evaluations were included. As hypothesized, evaluations of women faculty were less likely than those of men to include certain agentic language like power (odds ratio [OR] 0.9, P < .001) and insight (OR 0.9, P < .001), and research words (OR 0.6, P = .003). As expected, evaluations of women were more likely to include grindstone words, like "hardworking" (OR 1.2, P = .012). Contrary to our hypothesis, women received fewer teaching words like "mentor" (OR 0.9, P = .048) and communal words like "friendly" (OR 0.6, P = .001).
CONCLUSION
Certain stereotypic language was demonstrated in clinical teaching evaluations of pediatric faculty. These findings should be further examined to improve gender inequities in academic pediatrics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34923143
pii: S1876-2859(21)00624-0
doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2021.12.009
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
324-331Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Academic Pediatric Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.