Resource Inequality and Accumulative Advantage: Stratification in the Ministry

Social Forces ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 1289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Broughton ◽  
Edgar W. Mills
Keyword(s):  
Accumulative Advantage

Resource Inequality and Accumulative Advantage: Stratification in the Ministry

Social Forces ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 1289-1301 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Broughton ◽  
E. W. Mills
Keyword(s):  
Accumulative Advantage

Bias Literacy

2010 ◽  
pp. 21-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruta Sevo ◽  
Daryl E. Chubin
Keyword(s):  
Stereotype Threat ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Women In Science ◽  
Gender Schema ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Accumulative Advantage ◽  
Core Concepts ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Short Section ◽  
The U.S

The chapter offers a quick digest of the evidence for discrimination, especially with reference to women in science and engineering in the U.S. It explains common terminology and lists relevant legislation and national policy initiatives. The chapter summarizes the difference between tradition and bias, conscious and unconscious discrimination, overt and covert discrimination, and personal versus institution bias. Drawing on research in psychology and social science, it summarizes core concepts including: gender schema, accumulative advantage, stereotype threat, implicit bias, glass ceiling, mommy track, occupational segregation, statistical profiling, climate study, and the value of diversity in learning. A short section lists some U.S. national and international approaches to measuring whether discrimination is occurring and how improvements are benchmarked. There is a list of major organizations working for diversity in the U.S., with links. Many of the concepts are more fully described in the recent U.S. national report Beyond bias and barriers (2007), which inspired this literacy effort.

Productivity Differences Among Scientists: Evidence for Accumulative Advantage

1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Allison ◽  
John A. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Accumulative Advantage

scholarly journals How human capital, universities of excellence, third party funding, mobility and gender explain productivity in German political science

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel M. Habicht ◽  
Mark Lutter ◽  
Martin Schröder
Keyword(s):  
Human Capital ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Prior Publication ◽  
Principal Reason ◽  
Accumulative Advantage ◽  
Early Success ◽  
Entire Career ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Party Funding

AbstractUsing a unique panel dataset of virtually all German academic political scientists, we show that researchers become much more productive due to the accumulation of human capital and third party funding. We also show however, that while universities of excellence have more productive researchers, individuals who go there do not become more productive. Finally, we show how women publish only 9 percent less than men with the same level of prior publication experience, but are about 26 percent less productive over their entire career, as early productivity leads to later productivity, so that women increasingly fall behind. These results cannot be explained through the influence of childbearing. Rather, they support the ‘theory of limited differences’, which argues that small differences in early productivity accumulate to large differences over entire careers, as early success encourages later success. Apart from generally showing why political scientists publish more or less, we specifically identify accumulative advantage as the principal reason why women increasingly fall behind men over the course of their careers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document