Skip to main content Accessibility help

From “Her” Problem to “Our” Problem: Using an Individual Lens Versus a Social-Structural Lens to Understand Gender Inequity in STEM

  • Kathi N. Miner (a1), Jessica M. Walker (a1), Mindy E. Bergman (a1), Vanessa A. Jean (a1), Adrienne Carter-Sowell (a1), Samantha C. January (a1) and Christine Kaunas (a1)...


Increasing the representation of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is one of our nation's most pressing imperatives. As such, there has been increased lay and scholarly attention given to understanding the causes of women's underrepresentation in such fields. These explanations tend to fall into two main groupings: individual-level (i.e., her) explanations and social-structural (i.e., our) explanations. These two perspectives offer different lenses for illuminating the causes of gender inequity in STEM and point to different mechanisms by which to gain gender parity in STEM fields. In this article, we describe these two lenses and provide three examples of how each lens may differentially explain gender inequity in STEM. We argue that the social-structural lens provides a clearer picture of the causes of gender inequity in STEM, including how gaining gender equity in STEM may best be achieved. We then make a call to industrial/organizational psychologists to take a lead in addressing the societal-level causes of gender inequality in STEM.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      From “Her” Problem to “Our” Problem: Using an Individual Lens Versus a Social-Structural Lens to Understand Gender Inequity in STEM
      Available formats

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      From “Her” Problem to “Our” Problem: Using an Individual Lens Versus a Social-Structural Lens to Understand Gender Inequity in STEM
      Available formats

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      From “Her” Problem to “Our” Problem: Using an Individual Lens Versus a Social-Structural Lens to Understand Gender Inequity in STEM
      Available formats


Corresponding author

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kathi N. Miner, Department of Psychology, TAMU 4235, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. E-mail:


Hide All
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4, 139158.
Bagilhole, B., & Goode, J. (2001). The contradiction of the myth of individual merit, and the reality of a patriarchal support system in academic careers: A feminist investigation. European Journal of Women's Studies, 8 (2), 161180.
Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Bench, S. W., Lench, H. C., Liew, J., Miner, K., & Flores, S. A. (2015). Gender gaps in overestimation of math performance. Sex Roles, 72 (11–12), 536546.
Berger Peter, L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: First Anchor.
Bergman, M. E., Walker, J. M., & Jean, V. A. (2016). A simple solution to policing problems: Women! Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9 (3), 590597.
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic Review, 94 (4), 9911013.
Bianchi, S. M. (2011). Changing families, changing workplaces. The Future of Children, 21, 1526.
Biernat, M., Vescio, T. K., & Theno, S. A. (1996). Violating American values: A “value congruence” approach to understanding outgroup attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32 (4), 387410.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Employment characteristics of families—2013. Retrieved from
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). Labor force statistics from the Current Population Survey. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor. Retrieved from
Cech, E. A., & Blair-Loy, M. (2010). Perceiving glass ceilings? Meritocratic versus structural explanations of gender inequality among women in science and technology. Social Problems, 57 (3), 371397.
Ceci, S. J., Williams, W. M., & Barnett, S. M. (2009). Women's underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin, 135 (2), 218261.
Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P. G., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (6), 10451060.
Christopher, A. N., & Mull, M. S. (2006). Conservative ideology and ambivalent sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30 (2), 223230.
Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self‐assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106 (6), 16911730.
Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology, 112, 12971338.
Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108 (3), 593623.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31 (6), 874900.
Department of Labor. (2014). Women in the labor force. Retrieved from
Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21 (8), 10511057.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109 (3), 573598.
Ecklund, E. H., & Lincoln, A. E. (2011). Scientists want more children. PLoS ONE, 6 (8), e22590.
Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2 (1), 335362.
Freeman, R. B., & Huang, W. (2014). Strength in diversity: Richard B. Freeman and Wei Huang reflect on a link between a team's ethnic mix and highly cited papers. Nature, 513 (7518), 305306.
Frome, P. M., Alfeld, C. J., Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (2006). Why don't they want a male-dominated job? An investigation of young women who changed their occupational aspirations. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12 (4), 359372.
Furnham, A. (1982). The Protestant work ethic and attitudes towards unemployment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55 (4), 277285.
Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2002). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gilbert, D.T., & Malone, P.S. (1995). The corresponding bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117 (1), 2138.
Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of" blind" auditions on female musicians. American Economic Review, 90 (4), 715742.
Gorman, E. H. (2005). Gender stereotypes, same-gender preferences, and organizational variation in the hiring of women: Evidence from law firms. American Sociological Review, 70 (4), 702728.
Harton, H. C., & Lyons, P. C. (2003). Gender, empathy, and the choice of the psychology major. Teaching of Psychology, 30 (1), 1924.
Heaven, P. C. (1990). Human values and suggestions for reducing unemployment. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29 (3), 257264.
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269298.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57 (4), 657674.
Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Motherhood: a potential source of bias in employment decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (1), 189198.
Henrich, J., Heine, S.J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Science, 33, 6183.
Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47 (1), 237271.
Hochschild, A. (1989). The second shift. New York, NY: Avon Books.
Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.) (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
IU Bloomington Newsroom. (2015, March 26). Stereotypes lower math performance in women, but effects go unrecognized, IU study finds. IU Bloomington Newsroom. Retrieved from
Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25 (6), 881919.
Ju, A. (2011, February 7). Choices—not discrimination—determine women scientists’ success, researchers say. Cornell Chronicle. Retrieved from
Juhn, C., & Potter, S. (2006). Changes in labor force participation in the United States. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20 (3), 2746.
Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice—mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697720.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
King, E. B. (2008). The effect of bias on the advancement of working mothers: Disentangling legitimate concerns from inaccurate stereotypes as predictors of advancement in academe. Human Relations, 61, 16771711.
Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Krefting, L. A. (2003). Intertwined discourses of merit and gender: Evidence from academic employment in the USA. Gender, Work & Organization, 10 (2), 260278.
Kricheli‐Katz, T. (2012). Choice, discrimination, and the motherhood penalty. Law & Society Review, 46 (3), 557587.
Kricheli‐Katz, T. (2013). Choice‐based discrimination: Labor‐force‐type discrimination against gay men, the obese, and mothers. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 10 (4), 670695.
Leary, M. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). The nature and function of self-esteem: Sociometer theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 162.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Springer US.
Lonsway, K., Wood, M., Fickling, M., De Leon, A., Moore, M., Harrington, P., . . . Spillar, K. (2002). Men, women, and police excessive force: A tale of two genders. A content analysis of civil liability cases, sustained allegations, & citizen complaints. Arlington, VA: The National Center for Women & Policing. Retrieved from
Lorber, J. (1994). Paradoxes of gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (4), 777785.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.
Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98 (2), 224253.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2003, January). Models of agency: Sociocultural diversity in the construction of action. In Murphy-Berman, V. & Berman, J. J. (Eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Cultural differences in perspectives on the self (pp. 158). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Martin, P. Y. (2001). “Mobilizing masculinities”: Women's experiences of men at work. Organization, 8 (4), 587618.
Martin, P. Y. (2003). “Said and done” versus “saying and doing” gendering practices, practicing gender at work. Gender & Society, 17 (3), 342366.
Martin, P. Y. (2006). Practising gender at work: Further thoughts on reflexivity. Gender, Work & Organization, 13 (3), 254276.
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new big five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61 (3), 204217.
McArdle, E. (2008, 18 May). The freedom to say “no.” The Boston Globe. Retrieved from
Miller, G. E. (2004). Frontier masculinity in the oil industry: The experience of women engineers. Gender, Work & Organization, 11 (1), 4773.
Morrow, P. C. (1993). The theory and measurement of work commitment . Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.
Mosisa, A., & Hipple, S. (2006). Trends in labor force participation in the United States. Monthly Labor Review, 129, 3557.
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109 (41), 1647416479.
National Science Foundation. (2015). Report on women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Retrieved from
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2 (2), 175220.
Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., . . . Kesebir, S. (2009). National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (26), 1059310597.
O'Laughlin, E. M., & Bischoff, L. G. (2005). Balancing parenthood and academia: Work/family stress as influenced by gender and tenure status. Journal of Family Issues, 26, 79106.
O'Reilly, J., & Robinson, S. L. (2009). The negative impact of ostracism on thwarted belongingness and workplace contributions. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 17.
Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: A meta-analysis of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 134 (2), 270300.
Pazy, A., & Oron, I. (2001). Sex proportion and performance evaluation among high‐ranking military officers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22 (6), 689702.
Phillips, K. W. (2015, June 11). Gender and racial bias is systemic in the sciences. New York Times. Retrieved from
President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2012). Speech by Dr. Willie E. May. Retrieved from
Ratcliffe, R. (2015, June 10). Noble scientist Tim Hung: Female scientists cause trouble for men in labs. The Guardian. Retrieved from
Ren, L. R., Paetzold, R. L., & Colella, A. (2008). A meta-analysis of experimental studies on the effects of disability on human resource judgments. Human Resource Management Review, 18 (3), 191203.
Ridgeway, C. (1991). The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Social Forces, 70 (2), 367386.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering employment. American Sociological Review, 62 (2), 218235.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system a theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18 (4), 510531.
Rosenbloom, J.L., Ash, R.A., Dupont, B., & Coder, L. (2008). Why are there so few women in information technology? Assessing the role of personality in career choices. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 543554.
Rousseau, D. M., & McLean Parks, J. (1993). The contracts of individuals and organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 15, 143.
Savani, K., & Rattan, A. (2012). A choice mind-set increases the acceptance and maintenance of wealth inequality. Psychological Science, 23 (7), 796804.
Savani, K., Stephens, N. M., & Markus, H. R. (2011). The unanticipated interpersonal and societal consequences of choice victim blaming and reduced support for the public good. Psychological Science, 22 (6), 795802.
Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Barquissau, M. (2004). The costs of accepting gender differences: The role of stereotype endorsement in women's experience in the math domain. Sex Roles, 50 (11–12), 835850.
Schott, G., & Selwyn, N. (2000). Examining the “male, antisocial” stereotype of high computer users. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23 (3), 291303.
Schuck, A. M., & Rabe-Hemp, C. (2007). Women police: The use of force by and against female officers. Women & Criminal Justice, 16, 91117.
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. J. (1997). Self-evaluation: To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 209269.
Settles, I. H., & O'Connor, R. C. (2014). Incivility at academic conferences: Gender differences and the mediating role of climate. Sex Roles, 71 (1–2), 7182.
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Silvia, P. J., & Duval, T. S. (2001). Objective self-awareness theory: Recent progress and enduring problems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5 (3), 230241.
Simon, H. A. (1991). Cognitive architectures and rational analysis: Comment. In VanLehn, K. (Ed.), Architectures for intelligence (pp. 2539). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Smith-Lovin, L., & McPherson, J. M. (1993). You are who you know: A network approach to gender. In England, P. (Ed.), Theory on gender: Feminism on theory, 223251. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Spillar, K. (2015, July 2). How more female police officers would help stop police brutality. The Washington Post. Retrieved from
Spillar, K., Harrington, P., Wood, M., Aguirre, P., Aguilar, S., Yick, J., . . . Meza, L. (2000). Gender differences in the cost of police brutality and misconduct: A content analysis of LAPD civil liability cases: 1990–1999. Arlington, VA: The Feminist Majority Foundation and The National Center for Women & Policing. Retrieved from
Steinpreis, R. E., Anders, K. A., & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41 (7–8), 509528.
Stephens, N. M., & Levine, C. S. (2011). Opting out or denying discrimination? How the framework of free choice in American society influences perceptions of gender inequality. Psychological Science, 22 (10), 12311236.
Summers, L. H. (2005). Remarks at NBER conference on diversifying the science & engineering workforce. Retrieved April 19, 2018 from
Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 (2), 199214.
Triandis, H.C. (1995) Individualism & collectivism: New directions in social psychology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Trix, F., & Penska, C. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society, 14, 191220.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 11241131.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2013). America's family and living arrangements: 2012. Retrieved April 23, 2018 from
Valian, V. (1999). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
van Anders, S. M. (2004). Why the academic pipeline leaks: Fewer men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors. Sex Roles, 51, 511521.
Van Hoorn, A., & Maseland, R. (2013). Does a Protestant work ethic exist? Evidence from the well-being effect of unemployment. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 91, 112.
Weber, M. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism: The relationship between religion and the economic and social life of modern culture. New York, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Wennerås, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387 (6631), 341343.
Williams, J. (2000). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.


Related content

Powered by UNSILO

From “Her” Problem to “Our” Problem: Using an Individual Lens Versus a Social-Structural Lens to Understand Gender Inequity in STEM

  • Kathi N. Miner (a1), Jessica M. Walker (a1), Mindy E. Bergman (a1), Vanessa A. Jean (a1), Adrienne Carter-Sowell (a1), Samantha C. January (a1) and Christine Kaunas (a1)...


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.