“Gender Imbalance in Expert Testimony at U.S. Senate Hearings”: The Forum

Author:

Pressman Jeremy1

Affiliation:

1. University of Connecticut , Storrs , USA

Abstract

Abstract How much gender diversity is there among experts in the United States? This study focuses on witnesses who testified before four US Senate committees: Agriculture; Commerce, Science & Transportation; Foreign Relations; and Health, Education, Labor & Pensions. Across the 9072 witnesses (2003–15), women comprised 23.7% of witnesses. In terms of panels, 49.8% were male-only, 5.8% were female-only, and 44.4% were mixed gender. Although the overall numbers remain significantly low proportionate to the female share of the US population, there was an incremental increase in the proportion of women testifying and of mixed gender panels. Non-governmental organizations had the highest share of female witnesses. The percentage of female witnesses does vary with which party controls the Senate, with the average female share higher under Democratic control. These findings raise questions for further study about what factors influence the selection of witnesses for US Senate hearings and whether a similar lack of diversity exists in other identity categories such as race and ethnicity. The effort could also be extended to other committees in the Senate, as well as to the US House.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science

Reference14 articles.

1. Achen, C. 2014. “Why Do We Need Diversity in the Political Methodology Society?.” The Political Methodologist. April 30. https://thepoliticalmethodologist.com/2014/04/30/we-dont-just-teach-statistics-we-teach-students/.

2. Colgan, J. 2015. New Evidence on Gender Bias in IR Syllabi: Duck of Minerva. August 27. https://duckofminerva.com/2015/08/new-evidence-on-gender-bias-in-ir-syllabi.html.

3. Dion, M., J. Sumner, and S. M. Mitchell. 2018. “Gendered Citation Patterns across Political Science and Social Science Methodology Fields.” Political Analysis 26 (3): 312–27, https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.12.

4. Gray, K. 2014. The Status of Women in the U.S. Media 2014. Report of the Women’s Media Center. Retrieved from https://www.womensmediacenter.com/pages/statistics.

5. Hardt, H., H. J. Kim, A. E. Smith, and P. Meister. 2019. “The Gender Readings Gap in Political Science Graduate Training.” The Journal of Politics 81 (4): 1528–32. On-line: July 12, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429044595.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3