Selecting in or Selection Out? Gender Gaps and Political Methodology in Europe

• In Event: State of the Discipline in the Era of Democratic Discontent

Abstract

After building extensive bodies of literature to explain persistent gender gaps in political processes and institutions, political science has turned to itself. Recently, a number of studies have shed light into the ways in which gender biases continue to persist in academia, disadvantaging women from graduate school to tenured positions. Gender disparities have been found to be particularly pronounced in the subfield of political methodology, with women being less likely to employ quantitative methods than their male peers, publish articles that emphasize quantitative methods (Teele and Thelen 2017), and attend methods-focused conferences and events (Barnes and Beaulieu 2017; Barnes, Beaulieu and Krupnikov 2014; Esarey 2017). Some studies suggest that the gender gap in political methodology is a problem of selection: women may select out of computational methods due to early-socialization that distances them from math-related disciplines (Morrow-Jones and Box-Steffensmeier 2014), or the perception of methods-related courses and meetings as competitive and male-dominated environments (Shannon 2014). Others, have also posed that women may even employ the same methods as men, while still labeling themselves as methodologists less frequently (Esarey 2017). Women-only environments that promote networking, mentorship, and access to role models have proved promising initiatives in tackling this gender gap and promoting productivity (Barnes and Beaulieu 2017; Barnes, Beaulieu and Krupnikov 2014; Dion 2014). Still, much remains unknown about whether female and male postgraduate students acquire different methods training—and whether the patterns identified in the US are also observed elsewhere. Outside the US context, many doctoral programs do not have fixed graduate programs, potentially making the gender gap in methods specialisms even wider. We contribute to this discussion by employing an original survey covering the methods training of postgraduate students in European universities. As a means of shedding light into the ways in which existing gender gaps in methods may be addressed, we also complement our analysis by employing two surveys with applicants and participants of the first and second editions of the Zurich Summer School for Women in Political Methodology.

Authors

• Malu A. C. Gatto, University of Zurich

• Anita R. Gohdes, University of Zurich

• Denise Traber, University of Lucerne

• Mariken van der Velden, University of Zurich