For our research question, we began by simply brainstorming ideas regarding the concept of women in the workplace. We took into consideration our class discussions, as well as current articles we previously read as a class in order to formulate our question. The lens we will be viewing our project through is how women are put at a disadvantage in employee selection.Part 2The claim that we developed is that gender stereotypes significantly affect employment selections, often putting women at a disadvantage. The foundation of this claim is that when employers hire, they tend to focus more on a woman’s appearance rather than their ability. Some difficulties that might be encountered are the possible biased articles and the possible counterclaims. We can predict we will find a lot of biased articles that are based on experiences and opinions and not based on facts. Also, most employers will put more of an emphasis on women's appearance than men’s in the articles. A counterclaim could be that more women are currently being hired, so this puts them at an advantage in the workplace.Part 3 In conducting our research, we began by using EBSCO Host and using keywords relating to our topic, such as gender, stereotypes, modern workplace, employment, hiring decisions and more. These terms led us to several articles applying to our topic of how gender affects employee selection in the modern workplace. Many articles that we discovered actually focused on how women are overlooked when hiring due to gender stereotypes. This was very helpful in formulating our argument as many of the articles spoke from the viewpoint that we wanted to view our project through.Part 4
RAVEN: Article #1
Title: “Hiring Decisions: The Effect of Evaluator Gender and Gender Stereotype Characteristics on the Evaluation of Job Applicants.”
Author: Rice, Lindsay and Barth, Joan
Type (e.g. academic journal, periodical, book, etc.): Academic Journal
Date of publication: 17 May 2016
Reputation
While researching this article, I discovered that it was published by Springer. This source has published several articles in the past, focusing on the concepts of nursing, psychology, social work, gerontology, public health, counseling, rehabilitation healthcare administration, and medicine for over 65 years. This source has a very reliable reputation as it has published many accurate and dependable articles in the past.
Ability to see
The authors of this article is in a capable position to write this piece. This article includes many examples of how gender has affected employment decisions and provides evidence to assure that the author can support her claim. The authors do this by including information from other articles that focus on the same topic as well as results from their studies and integrates them into their article to form their claim as well as support it.
Vested interest
This article considers a study that the authors did to examine how gender affects hiring decisions. This causes the authors to have vested interest, for if they lied about their results of their study, they could potentially lose a lot. This increases the authors’ credibility and the accuracy of the ideas shared in this article.
Expertise
The authors of this article may be considered experts on this concept. This article includes a large amount of research from a study the the authors conducted as well as many aspects of other studies regarding the same subject to support their claim. With such a large amount of accurate information pertaining to the subject, the authors may be considered experts in the field of this article.
Neutrality
The authors of this article speak from a neutral standpoint. They examine the concept of the article through several different perspectives, reassuring that they are unbiased. Because their article was written based off of a study, the article solely relied on factual evidence conducted from their study, causing the authors to be unbiased.
Is this source reliable? Why or why not?
This source is very reliable. The publisher of this article holds a very strong reputation having published many dependable articles in the past regarding similar subjects. The authors of this article are in a capable position of writing this piece, as they conducted prior evidence to support their claim from a study regarding what they wanted to prove through this article. The authors of this article show vested interest through sharing their results of their study. If the authors were to lie about their results, they could potentially lose a lot, increasing their credibility. The authors hold expertise in the subject of this article, for they completed a large study to prove their claim. By carrying out this study, the authors have discovered an extensive amount of information regarding the topic, causing them to be considered experts in the field. This article has been written from a neutral standpoint. Considering that this article has been largely written based on facts, the article includes no biased information or opinion, concluding that the authors held no predisposed beliefs to the subject of the article, increasing the credibility of the authors. This article is a very reliable source.
Argument Analysis
Title and Author:
“Hiring Decisions: The Effect of Evaluator Gender and Gender Stereotype Characteristics on the Evaluation of Job Applicants.” by Rice, Lindsay and Barth, Joan.
Does the author have an argument? If yes, what is the main idea?
The authors’ argument in this article is that gender affects hiring decisions. In this article, the authors share how they oversaw a study regarding their argument and share their results. Their results showed how gender does in fact largely affect who employers choose to hire. The authors focus on conveying how gender plays a significant role when hiring and how women are often overseen when hiring. Women have a much smaller chance of receiving jobs that are viewed to be more dominant by men. The authors convey their argument through extensive studies and results.
What reasons does the author give to support his or her main idea? (What claims are made to support the argument?)
The authors of this article are able to support their main idea through information discovered through their studies. In their study, the authors learn that gender has a significant effect in hiring decisions. In further discoveries, it is learned that women are put at a disadvantage in employment. This shows how gender affects hiring decisions, as women hold a much smaller chance of receiving jobs that are viewed to be more dominant by men. This is solely because of their gender, not their ability to do the job. These claims that women are put at a disadvantage in hiring decisions support the argument that gender affects hiring decisions.
What evidence does the author use to support these reasons/claims? Is it credible? Is it biased?
The authors of this article use evidence conducted through their studies to support their claims. This evidence includes results from their studies that show how gender affects hiring decisions, which causes women to be put at a disadvantage. This evidence is credible as it was conducted through a real-world study and was gathered with accurate results from the study. This evidence is unbiased because it is entirely factual, based on results from the study.
Are these reasons and evidence convincing? Why or why not? Are there implicit assumptions?
These reasons and evidence are convincing because they are based off of a study with real people and real experiences. Because the evidence is factual, it causes the article to be unbiased, increasing the credibility of the article. This creates a very convincing platform for the authors’ argument. Implicit assumptions that women are put at a disadvantage in many occupations are developed through the claims of the authors.
What do you think was the author’s purpose in writing this piece?
The authors’ purpose in writing this piece was to share a study and results based on the effects of gender on employment. The authors want to convey how the results of their study support their argument. Their study shows how women are often put at a disadvantage in hiring, supporting their argument in how gender affects hiring decisions.
Are the reasons presented in a logical order, as a line of reasoning? Do the reasons clearly link to one another and to the conclusion/thesis?
The reasons in this article are presented in a logical order. The reasons flow with each aspect of the study as it continues to the results. The reasons clearly link as they flow with each claim in the article.
Does the author make a reasoned evaluation of other people’s views that contradict their own? (Does he or she address counter-arguments?)
The authors of this article address several counter-arguments. These limitations include that the subjects in the study were college students, which may have had a large effect on the results of the study. Another counter-argument made in this article is that more women were included in the study than men. The authors share that this was only a small factor in the argument though, for they feel that there were enough to have accurate results. These limitations help strengthen the authors’ argument as they share more perspectives to view their argument through.
What are the implications if the reader accepts this argument?
If the reader accepts this argument, they may conclude that gender stereotypes such as that men are stronger than women, men have more authority over women, or men are more intelligent than women do in fact affect hiring decisions. Readers may be able to imply that these stereotypes cause women to be overlooked when applying for jobs solely because of their gender. This helps readers to understand how these gender stereotypes have evolved over time and how they have changed the dynamic in the modern workplace because of employment decisions.
RAVEN: Article #2
Title: “Women's Inequality in the Workplace as Framed in News Discourse: Refracting from Gender Ideology.”
Author: Gazso, Amber
Type (e.g. academic journal, periodical, book, etc.): Academic Journal
Date of publication: 2004
Part 1: Fill in the following chart with as much detail as possible.
Reputation
Amber Gazso is an Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology at York University in Toronto, Canada. She joined this Department in 2006. She has a Ph.D. in Sociology from University of Alberta, a M.A. in Sociology from University of Western Ontario, and a B.A. in Criminal Justice from University of Fraser Valley. Her interests are sociology, gender issues, family and intimate relationships, poverty, and social policy. Her professional associates are American Sociology Association, Canadian Sociology Association, International Sociological Association, and Pacific Sociological Association. Amber has a very successful career. Her reputation professionally is well-respected.
Ability to see
Amber Gazso has the ability to see in this topic. Her heavy background in Sociology gives her a great foundation and avenue to conduct research. She is experienced in the field which will allow her to give an in depth and well-informed in gender inequality when hiring.
Vested interest
Amber Gazso has a clean vested interest. When researching, there was no reason found that she would have gained from the article. She is a women in the workplace which means that she might suffer from gender inequality when hiring. However, there is no proof that this article was written to better her position when applying for jobs.
Expertise
The author does not lack in expertise in this area. She has a degree in sociology and has a particular interests in gender issues. Amber has written numerous papers on gender in the workplace such as “Women’s Inequality in the Workplace as Framed in News Discourse: Refracting from Gender Ideology.”, ”Staying Afloat on Social Assistance: Parents’ Strategies of Balancing Work and Family.”, and more. She has pubdlished articles in Canadian Journal of Sociology, Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, and Socialist Studies.
Neutrality
Since she is a female her opinion is slightly bias. She is analysing a newspaper article. When doing this, she frames women’s inequality in the workplace when hiring. She explains how women just do not fit in a man’s world and a women “natural” choice. During these part she seems a bit bias. She is like this throughout to article. Overall, it is not too noticeable or overbearing.
Part 2: Is this source reliable? Why or why not? (Answer in complete sentences.)
Yes, this source is reliable. The author is well-educated with a respected position which she cannot risk by writing an unreliable article. Since the article deals with the gender inequality in the workplace while hiring, her sociology degree and background are reliable and allow her to see. She has no particular vested interest that would poison her article. Amber Gazso expertise on this subject is astounding. She has written and researched many other articles on gender equality in the workplace and one of her interests is in gender issue. Although she is clearly favoring the women’s position, she does present the other arguments and is not overbearing.
Argument Analysis: Article #2
Title and Author:
“Women's Inequality in the Workplace as Framed in News Discourse: Refracting from Gender Ideology.” by Amber Gazso
Does the author have an argument? If yes, what is the main idea?
The authors’ argument in this article is that gender inequality in the workplace is a result of the framing of gender in the workplace.The newspaper article that the author is analysing states women's unequal workplace experiences are framed as a result of their inability to "fit in," "natural" choices and "juggling" of work and family responsibilities. The main idea is to answer the questions: “How is news discourse on women's inequality in the workplace framed by gender?” and “How does news discourse on women's inequality in the workplace further construct gender?”.
What reasons does the author give to support his or her main idea? (What claims are made to support the argument?)
The claim that is made is that most of the news and media presents women's unequal workplace experiences result because women are crossing over clearly laid-out ideological boundaries of which sphere is appropriate for women and which sphere is appropriate for men.
What evidence does the author use to support these reasons/claims? Is it credible? Is it biased?
The author of this article use newspaper articles to as evidence. The authors presents the different frames in which the news views gender inequality in the workplace. She analyses and dissects what each one means. It is credible because it present all of the different ways the topic can be viewed. When she dissects these different frames she either debunks them or proves them to be true with evidence.
Are these reasons and evidence convincing? Why or why not? Are there implicit assumptions?
These reasons and evidence are somewhat convincing. The somewhat convincing is because when the author selects a certain newspaper article to support a point or claim, it feels as though the author has ignored many other article and does not present the counter article. The assumptions that are made are all understandable and supported.
What do you think was the author’s purpose in writing this piece?
The author’s purpose in writing this piece was to bring a focus to the different ways and frames people view inequality in the workplace because it is such a researched subject. While analysing the different frames the news uses, she points out the flaws in each of them. The author’s purpose was to display the convoluted views of the news.
Are the reasons presented in a logical order, as a line of reasoning? Do the reasons clearly link to one another and to the conclusion/thesis?
The reasons in this article are presented in a logical order. The reasons flow as the author presents each frame and explains why it is convoluted and what exactly it is saying.
Does the author make a reasoned evaluation of other people’s views that contradict their own? (Does he or she address counter-arguments?)
This article was a bit different in the sense that it present all of these different frames and perspectives. Some of them contradicted each other. However, the author presented the weakness in all of the different frames. However, at the end it claims one of the frames to be more true. The author acknowledge limitations in the study one being that race and class also play a huge role in inequality in the workplace that cannot be ignored. It is not just gender.
What are the implications if the reader accepts this argument?
If the reader accepts this argument, than they will believe that women's unequal workplace experiences result because women are crossing over clearly laid-out ideological boundaries of which sphere is appropriate for women and which sphere is appropriate for men.
Part 5
In our research, we found there was a test conducted. During this test both men and women received applications from men and women, they then decided who they were most likely to hire based on the characteristic the applicant possessed. The results were the person hiring favored those of their own gender with the stereotypical masculine or feminine traits. The research showed that men who were hiring were more likely to adhere to gender stereotypes. Men hold stereotypical masculine personality and cognitive traits such as competent, assertive, leader higher in their evaluations which put women at a disadvantage. Men show less favorable ratings to women overall which supports our claim. A counterclaim that was encountered was that women are more likely to be hired due to the fact that many businesses and companies want to diversify their employees. This impacted our research since it propelled us to evaluate if this statement overpowered ours about how women were at this disadvantage.