example of research question about gender equality

10 QUESTIONS ON GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION

Test your knowledge: take our quiz!

An estimated 132 million girls are out of school around the world.

Source: UNESCO (2019)

Why are so many girls out of school globally? The barriers to girls’ education are complex, and differ from community to community. Some of the gender-specific barriers to education faced by girls include harmful social and gender norms, child marriage, conflict and instability, child labour, and the cost of education.

More Inclusive Gender Questions Added to the General Social Survey

The General Social Survey, or GSS, is one of the most important data sources for researchers studying American society. For the first time ever in its nearly 50-year history, the survey’s 2018 data release includes information on respondents’ self-identified sex and gender. The new data will allow researchers to measure the size of the transgender and gender non-binary populations and identify the challenges they face, information that can in turn shape public policy. The research of former Clayman Institute faculty fellow, Aliya Saperstein, supported this important change.

First fielded in 1972, the GSS is an especially important source of longitudinal data for social scientists. Longitudinal data derive value in part by asking identically worded questions at each time point. This allows researchers to attribute changes in how respondents answer demographic, attitudinal, and behavioral questions to real changes over time rather than to changes in question wording. Changing or adding questions is not simple. Old questions may be known to be valid, whereas new questions may pose challenges related to understandability and reliability. Researchers may be uncertain about whether new questions really measure what they believe they do. However, over time, old questions may not accurately reflect newer academic understandings of the concepts they are meant to measure. When budgets are fixed, survey designers make tradeoffs when deciding whether to keep an old question or update it.

On previous surveys, interviewers selected “male” or “female” on behalf of—and without directly asking—respondents. Yet, since the GSS’s first iteration, social scientists’ understanding of sex has changed markedly in ways that conflict with this measurement.

These tensions are embodied by the measurement of sex historically used by the GSS. On previous surveys, interviewers selected “male” or “female” on behalf of—and without directly asking—respondents. Yet, since the GSS’s first iteration, social scientists’ understanding of sex has changed markedly in ways that conflict with this measurement. For one, many scholars differentiate sex from gender. They understand sex to be based in biological factors, like anatomy, and comprised of categories like “male,” “female,” and “intersex.” Gender, on the other hand, involves behavioral expectations and is comprised of categories like “men,” “women,” “transgender,” and more. Additionally, social scientists acknowledge the importance of self-identification, and so seek to know how the respondent describes their own gender rather than how the interviewer describes it.

In recent years, sociologists have raised concerns about how surveys measure sex. Laurel Westbrook, associate professor of sociology at Grand Valley State University, and Aliya Saperstein, associate professor of sociology at Stanford University and former Clayman Institute faculty fellow, examined the questions used to measure sex on four of the largest and longest-running social science surveys, including the GSS. In an article published in Gender & Society in 2015, they critiqued survey questions for treating sex and gender as equivalent, immutable, and easily identified by others. According to Saperstein, precisely measuring sex and gender is an essential step in drawing attention to issues, like discrimination, faced by transgender and gender non-binary people. Saperstein said, “Whether we like it or not, numbers are what convince policymakers, what people turn to when they’re trying to make powerful rhetorical arguments about why something matters. They want a percentage.” Yet previously available data did not allow researchers to measure the size of the transgender and gender non-binary populations, let alone determine whether they are disadvantaged.

In the spring of 2014, Saperstein and Westbrook submitted a proposal to the GSS Board of Overseers to add several new questions related to sex and gender to the 2016 survey. Among these questions was a so-called two-step gender question, which asked respondents to separately identify the sex they were assigned at birth and their current gender. To illustrate that these questions were valid, Saperstein and Westbrook pre-tested the questions using national surveys. ( Their pre-test data is publicly available at openICPSR.) According to Saperstein, the board was unable to add their proposed questions to the 2016 GSS because of budgetary constraints.

Other sociologists had similar concerns about the sex measure on the GSS. D’Lane Compton, associate professor of sociology at the University of New Orleans, Kristen Schilt, associate professor of sociology at the University of Chicago, and Danya Lagos, doctoral candidate in sociology at the University of Chicago, submitted a proposal to add questions to the 2018 GSS. In addition to proposing several attitudinal questions, they advocated for the two-step gender question. Using previously published studies and other datasets, they provided evidence  to the members of the GSS Board of Overseers that the two-step question was reliable. Brian Powell, professor of sociology at Indiana University Bloomington and then-board member, said board members were concerned about measurement error—for instance, resulting from respondents misunderstanding the question—and small sample size. Still, many board members were convinced that the sex question historically used by the GSS did not accurately reflect the experience of some people in the United States and needed to be changed. “I think it’s worth it, and the board thought it was worth it,” Powell said.

The two-step gender question was adopted by the board and fielded in 2018. The adoption represents, in Powell’s words, a “truly collective effort” between the sociologists who advocated for the change, the GSS Board of Overseers, the GSS principal investigators, funders of the GSS such as the National Science Foundation, and NORC, the independent research organization at the University of Chicago that runs the GSS. Westbrook credits a number of researchers for advocating for the change in recent years, including Clayman Institute Director Shelley J. Correll and Stanford Professor (Emerita) of Social Sciences Cecilia Ridgeway, as well as Powell, Compton, Schilt and Lagos.

The two-step gender question was fielded to just over 1,400 respondents. The first question reads, “What sex were you assigned at birth? (For example, on your birth certificate)” and allows respondents to select “Female,” “Male,” “Intersex,” or “No answer.” The second question asks, “What is your current gender?” Respondents were able to select “Woman,” “Man,” “Transgender,” “A gender not listed here,” and “No answer.”

The 2018 data was released in March of this year, so researchers already can access its more than 1,000 variables, including the new two-step gender question. Saperstein said that nine, or 0.6%, of the 1,397 respondents who answered the two-step gender questions can be considered transgender or gender non-binary. Saperstein noted that, because of the small sample size, the data cannot yet be used to answer the most pressing, statistical questions about the transgender and gender non-binary populations. Researchers will have to wait for future data releases, which also will include the two-step gender question. For now, Saperstein said, “Just having the questions on the survey offers a different kind of a power, a kind of symbolic power that recognizes the actual gender diversity of the population.” 

The data eventually can be used to assess any disadvantages transgender and gender non-binary people are experiencing, which can be used to shape public policy. Compton, the sociologist from the University of New Orleans, said, “I think if we want to make real change and have resources and rights, we do need to have these numbers. Those are important.” 

(photo by Zackary Drucker for The Gender Spectrum Collection)

Recent Articles

“Not a Sprint, but a Relay Race:” Anita Hill’s Politics of Hope

Heroism, intimacy, and beliefs about life and death surface in historic research about drowning

The diverse and precarious world of the “influencer economy”

Gender equality in research: papers and projects by Highly Cited Researchers

Strategic Alliances and Engagement Manager

Empowering women and girls is a critical target of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this installment of our blog series about Highly Cited Researchers contributing to the UN SDGs, we focus on SDG 5: Gender Equality. We discuss the research that Highly Cited Researchers have published and the trends we’re seeing emerge.

Gender equality is a fundamental human right and yet women have just three quarters of the legal rights of men today. While the speed of progress differs across regions, laws, policies, budgets and institutions must all be strengthened on an international scale to grant women equal rights as men.

The socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and high-profile policy changes like the overturning of Roe v. Wade have shown how much work needs to be done. The COVID-19 pandemic caused many women to leave the workforce and amplified challenges related to child and elder care, with women shouldering much of the burden. This can disproportionately affect girls’ educational prospects and, as is often the case in stressful environments and during times of crisis, puts women at increased risk of domestic violence .

While some high-profile issues related to women’s rights and safety make the news cycle, gender inequalities are firmly entrenched in every society, impacting the daily lives of women and girls in ways that are rarely reported on. As Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States, once said , “from the economy to climate change to criminal justice reform to national security, all issues are women’s issues.”

Women’s issues are interconnected with all the SDGs, as we touched on in our recent post in this series, which explored the research centered around SDG 16: Peaceful, just and strong institutions . In that post we found that sexual, domestic and intimate partner abuse and violence against women are the most published topics related to SDG 16.

In this post, we look at Highly Cited Researchers who focus specifically on SDG 5 and issues of equality and gender .

What is SDG 5: Gender equality?

SDG 5: Gender Equality is intended to address the serious inequalities and threats faced by women around the globe. The targets related to this goal include:

• End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.
• Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
• Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.

There has been an increase in articles and reviews related to this SDG since the establishment of the SDGs in 2015. This trend graph from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics ™, using Web of Science Core Collection ™ data, shows growth from 86,000 papers in 2015 to 152,000 in 2021. That’s a 77% increase in six years.

Growth in academic papers related to SDG 5: Gender Equality

Source: Incites Benchmarking & Analytics. Dataset: articles and reviews related to SDG 5: Gender Equality published between 2015-2021.

The top ten countries publishing on SDG 5: Gender Equality during this period are shown below, with the U.S. producing roughly one third of all papers.

Countries producing the most papers related to SDG 5: Gender Equality

We explore these angles from research published between 2010 and 2020 in more detail, below.

Inequalities in the treatment of women during childbirth

Özge Tunçalp , a Highly Cited Researcher from the World Health Organization (WHO), wrote a systematic review in 2015 about the mistreatment of women globally during childbirth. This paper, coauthored with Johns Hopkins University, McGill University, University of Sao Paulo and PSI (a global nonprofit working in healthcare), has been cited more than 590 times to date in the Web of Science Core Collection. Tunçalp’s paper provides further information about the type and degree of mistreatment in childbirth, which supports the development of measurement tools, programs and interventions in this area.

Tunçalp authored another open access paper on this topic in 2019 , which followed women in four low-income and middle-income countries to study their experiences during childbirth. Unfortunately, more than one third of the women in the study experienced mistreatment during childbirth, a critical time in their lives, with younger and less educated women found to be most at risk. Beyond showing that mistreatment during childbirth exists, this study demonstrates the inequalities in how some women are treated in comparison to others, which informs the interventions needed.

“Our research showed that mistreatment during childbirth occurs across low-, middle- and high-income countries and good quality of care needs to be respectful as well as safe, no matter where you are in the world.” Dr Özge Tunçalp, World Health Organization

According to Dr. Tunçalp, “Women and families have a right to positive pregnancy, childbirth and postnatal experiences, supported by empowered health workers, majority of whom are women. Improving the experience of care throughout pregnancy and childbirth is essential to help increase the trust in facility-based care – as well as ensuring access to quality postnatal care following birth. Our research showed that mistreatment during childbirth occurs across low-, middle- and high-income countries and good quality of care needs to be respectful as well as safe, no matter where you are in the world. It was critical to ensure that these findings were translated into WHO global recommendations to inform country policy and programmes .”

Autism spectrum disorder and the gender bias in diagnosis

William Mandy, a Highly Cited Researcher in Psychiatry and Psychology, looks at gender differences related to autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Mandy, from University College London, and his co-authors found that the male-to-female ratio of children with ASD is closer to 3:1, not the often assumed 4:1 . With an apparent gender bias in diagnosis, girls who meet the criteria for ASD are at risk of being misdiagnosed or not diagnosed at all. This can cause confusion and challenges with social interactions growing up, and can put women and girls at greater risk of traumatic experiences. Mandy et al’s paper has been cited more than 830 times to date.

“The reason for this diagnostic bias is that sex and gender influence how autism presents, such that the presentations of autistic girls and women often do not fit well with current conceptualisations of the condition, which were largely based on mainly male samples.” Dr William Mandy, University College London

When asked about the relevance of his research to the clinical community, Dr. Mandy said: “Clinicians have long held the suspicion that there is a diagnostic bias against autistic girls and women – that they are more likely to fly under the diagnostic radar. Our work (Loomes et al., 2017) has helped to provide systematic, empirical evidence that this bias does indeed exist, and to quantify its impact, in terms of how many autistic girls go undiagnosed.

The reason for this diagnostic bias is that sex and gender influence how autism presents, such that the presentations of autistic girls and women often do not fit well with current conceptualisations of the condition, which were largely based on mainly male samples. Therefore, to address the gender bias in autism diagnosis, we need an evidence-based understanding of the characteristics of autistic girls and women. Our study (Bargiela et al, 2016), in which we interviewed late-diagnosed autistic women about their lives, helps do this, revealing distinctive features of autistic women and of their experiences. This knowledge is shaping research and clinical practice.”

Going forward

The above papers are just a few examples of Highly Cited Researchers contributing to SDG 5-Gender Equality. Others focus on depression, Alzheimer’s Disease, cardiovascular disease and ovarian cancer. The fact that biomedical research featured so prominently in these results should not be a surprise. Gender bias has been identified in many areas of healthcare, including patient diagnosis , discrimination against health care workers , and low rates of women in clinical studies to name a few.

The Highly Cited Researchers working on gender equality within their respective fields, which also include social sciences, economics and other areas in addition to medicine, are helping to address the complex issues related to SDG 5. And what’s worthy of note is that many of the researchers mentioned here were named as Highly Cited Researchers in the cross-field category, which identifies researchers who have contributed to Highly Cited Papers across several different fields. This shows that a multifaceted and integrated approach to gender equality research may be playing a significant role in addressing this global issue.

Stay up to date

We discussed the SDG Publishers Compact in the first post in our series and then celebrated the Highly Cited Researchers in SDG 1: No Poverty and SDG 2: Zero Hunger. We then covered SDG 3: Good Health and Well-Being and SDG 4: Quality Education , and then jumped ahead to cover SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions . Alongside this, we also looked at Ukrainian research contributions to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, here , and published an Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)™Insights paper called, Climate change collaboration: Why we need an international approach to research .

In our next post, we will identify Highly Cited Researchers who are working to address SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation.

At Clarivate, sustainability is at the heart of everything we do, and this includes support of human rights, diversity and inclusion, and social justice. Read more about our commitment to driving sustainability worldwide, and see highlights from our 2021 Clarivate Sustainability Report .

Related posts

Unlocking u.k. research excellence: key insights from the research professional news live summit.

For better insights, assess research performance at the department level

Getting the Full Picture: Institutional unification in the Web of Science

Frequently asked questions about gender equality

Resource date: 2005

Author: UNFPA

What is meant by gender?

The term gender refers to the economic, social and cultural attributes and opportunities associated with being male or female. In most societies, being a man or a woman is not simply a matter of different biological and physical characteristics. Men and women face different expectations about how they should dress, behave or work. Relations between men and women, whether in the family, the workplace or the public sphere, also reflect understandings of the talents, characteristics and behaviour appropriate to women and to men. Gender thus differs from sex in that it is social and cultural in nature rather than biological. Gender attributes and characteristics, encompassing, inter alia, the roles that men and women play and the expectations placed upon them, vary widely among societies and change over time. But the fact that gender attributes are socially constructed means that they are also amenable to change in ways that can make a society more just and equitable.

What is the difference between gender equity, gender equality and women’s empowerment?

Gender equity is the process of being fair to women and men. To ensure fairness, strategies and measures must often be available to compensate for women’s historical and social disadvantages that prevent women and men from otherwise operating on a level playing field. Equity leads to equality. Gender equality requires equal enjoyment by women and men of socially-valued goods, opportunities, resources and rewards. Where gender inequality exists, it is generally women who are excluded or disadvantaged in relation to decision-making and access to economic and social resources. Therefore a critical aspect of promoting gender equality is the empowerment of women, with a focus on identifying and redressing power imbalances and giving women more autonomy to manage their own lives. Gender equality does not mean that men and women become the same; only that access to opportunities and life changes is neither dependent on, nor constrained by, their sex. Achieving gender equality requires women’s empowerment to ensure that decision-making at private and public levels, and access to resources are no longer weighted in men’s favour, so that both women and men can fully participate as equal partners in productive and reproductive life.

Why is it important to take gender concerns into account in programme design and implementation?

Taking gender concerns into account when designing and implementing population and development programmes therefore is important for two reasons. First, there are differences between the roles of men and women, differences that demand different approaches. Second, there is systemic inequality between men and women. Universally, there are clear patterns of women’s inferior access to resources and opportunities. Moreover, women are systematically under-represented in decision-making processes that shape their societies and their own lives. This pattern of inequality is a constraint to the progress of any society because it limits the opportunities of one-half of its population. When women are constrained from reaching their full potential, that potential is lost to society as a whole. Programme design and implementation should endeavour to address either or both of these factors.

What is gender mainstreaming?

Gender mainstreaming is a strategy for integrating gender concerns in the analysis, formulation and monitoring of policies, programmes and projects. It is therefore a means to an end, not an end in itself; a process, not a goal. The purpose of gender mainstreaming is to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women in population and development activities. This requires addressing both the condition, as well as the position, of women and men in society. Gender mainstreaming therefore aims to strengthen the legitimacy of gender equality values by addressing known gender disparities and gaps in such areas as the division of labour between men and women; access to and control over resources; access to services, information and opportunities; and distribution of power and decision-making. UNFPA has adopted the mainstreaming of gender concerns into all population and development activities as the primary means of achieving the commitments on gender equality, equity and empowerment of women stemming from the International Conference on Population and Development.

Gender mainstreaming, as a strategy, does not preclude interventions that focus only on women or only on men. In some instances, the gender analysis that precedes programme design and development reveals severe inequalities that call for an initial strategy of sex-specific interventions. However, such sex-specific interventions should still aim to reduce identified gender disparities by focusing on equality or inequity as the objective rather than on men or women as a target group. In such a context, sex-specific interventions are still important aspects of a gender mainstreaming strategy. When implemented correctly, they should not contribute to a marginalization of men in such a critical area as access to reproductive and sexual health services. Nor should they contribute to the evaporation of gains or advances already secured by women. Rather, they should consolidate such gains that are central building blocks towards gender equality.

Why is gender equality important?

Gender equality is intrinsically linked to sustainable development and is vital to the realization of human rights for all. The overall objective of gender equality is a society in which women and men enjoy the same opportunities, rights and obligations in all spheres of life. Equality between men and women exists when both sexes are able to share equally in the distribution of power and influence; have equal opportunities for financial independence through work or through setting up businesses; enjoy equal access to education and the opportunity to develop personal ambitions, interests and talents; share responsibility for the home and children and are completely free from coercion, intimidation and gender-based violence both at work and at home.

Within the context of population and development programmes, gender equality is critical because it will enable women and men to make decisions that impact more positively on their own sexual and reproductive health as well as that of their spouses and families. Decision-making with regard to such issues as age at marriage, timing of births, use of contraception, and recourse to harmful practices (such as female genital cutting) stands to be improved with the achievement of gender equality.

However it is important to acknowledge that where gender inequality exists, it is generally women who are excluded or disadvantaged in relation to decision-making and access to economic and social resources. Therefore a critical aspect of promoting gender equality is the empowerment of women, with a focus on identifying and redressing power imbalances and giving women more autonomy to manage their own lives. This would enable them to make decisions and take actions to achieve and maintain their own reproductive and sexual health. Gender equality and women’s empowerment do not mean that men and women become the same; only that access to opportunities and life changes is neither dependent on, nor constrained by, their sex.

Is gender equality a concern for men?

The achievement of gender equality implies changes for both men and women. More equitable relationships will need to be based on a redefinition of the rights and responsibilities of women and men in all spheres of life, including the family, the workplace and the society at large. It is therefore crucial not to overlook gender as an aspect of men’s social identity. This fact is, indeed, often overlooked, because the tendency is to consider male characteristics and attributes as the norm, and those of women as a variation of the norm.

But the lives of men are just as strongly influenced by gender as those of women. Societal norms and conceptions of masculinity and expectations of men as leaders, husbands or sons create demands on men and shape their behaviour. Men are too often expected to concentrate on the material needs of their families, rather than on the nurturing and caring roles assigned to women. Socialization in the family and later in schools promotes risk-taking behaviour among young men, and this is often reinforced through peer pressure and media stereotypes. So the lifestyles that men’s roles demand often result in their being more exposed to greater risks of morbidity and mortality than women. These risks include ones relating to accidents, violence and alcohol consumption.

Men also have the right to assume a more nurturing role, and opportunities for them to do so should be promoted. Equally, however, men have responsibilities in regard to child health and to their own and their partners’ sexual and reproductive health. Addressing these rights and responsibilities entails recognizing men’s specific health problems, as well as their needs and the conditions that shape them. The adoption of a gender perspective is an important first step; it reveals that there are disadvantages and costs to men accruing from patterns of gender difference. It also underscores that gender equality is concerned not only with the roles, responsibilities and needs of women and men, but also with the interrelationships between them.

We use cookies and other identifiers to help improve your online experience. By using our website you agree to this, see our cookie policy

Advertisement

Promoting Gender Equality: A Systematic Review of Interventions

• Open access
• Published: 01 September 2022
• Volume 35 , pages 318–343, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Michaela Guthridge   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5157-9839 1 , 3 ,
• Maggie Kirkman 2 ,
• Tania Penovic 4 , 5 &
• Melita J. Giummarra 1 , 5  

20k Accesses

17 Citations

14 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

More than four decades have passed since the United Nation’s Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) was adopted. Now is an opportune time to consider whether the interventions seeking to realise CEDAW’s aspirations have brought us closer to achieving gender equality. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesise evidence for the effectiveness of social justice, cognitive, or behaviour-change interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women or girls. Interventions could be implemented in any context, with any mode of delivery and duration, if they measured gender equity or discrimination outcomes, and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Papers on violence against women and sexuality were not eligible. Seventy-eight papers reporting qualitative (n = 36), quantitative (n = 23), and multi-methods (n = 19) research projects met the eligibility criteria after screening 7,832 citations identified from psycINFO, ProQuest, Scopus searches, reference lists and expert recommendations. Findings were synthesised narratively. Improved gender inclusion was the most frequently reported change (n = 39), particularly for education and media interventions. Fifty percent of interventions measuring social change in gender equality did not achieve beneficial effects. Most gender mainstreaming interventions had only partial beneficial effects on outcomes, calling into question their efficacy in practice. Twenty-eight interventions used education and awareness-raising strategies, which also predominantly had only partial beneficial effects. Overall research quality was low to moderate, and the key findings created doubt that interventions to date have achieved meaningful change. Interventions may not have achieved macrolevel change because they did not explicitly address meso and micro change. We conclude with a summary of the evidence for key determinants of the promotion of gender equality, including a call to address men’s emotional responses (micro) in the process of achieving gender equality (micro/meso/macrolevels).

Similar content being viewed by others

Mechanisms behind gender transformative approaches targeting adolescent pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries: a realist synthesis protocol

Shruti Shukla, Ibukun-Oluwa Omolade Abejirinde, … Janina Isabel Steinert

Operationalising masculinities in theories and practices of gender-transformative health interventions: a scoping review

Julia Zielke, Stephanie Batram-Zantvoort, … Céline Miani

Beyond gender mainstreaming: transforming humanitarian action, organizations and culture

Geeta Rao Gupta, Caren Grown, … Sia Nowrojee

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The adoption of CEDAW was a remarkable achievement in the history of the women’s movement. Its ultimate aim was to catalyse social transformation that transcends cursory legislative reform (Facio & Morgan, 2009 ). Article 3 of CEDAW promotes this social transformation, calling for state parties to ‘take all appropriate measures’ to achieve gender equality. In practice this has included, but has not been limited to, gender-blind strategies, awareness raising, litigation, international advocacy, art and social media activism, and gender mainstreaming (see Table 1 for definition).

The Global Gender Gap Index 2022 benchmarks 146 countries on the evolution of gender-based gaps in economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment (World Economic Forum, 2022 ). Although the Index measures gender parity (defined in Table 1 ) rather than substantive equality, it is a useful tool for analysing progression and regression. With scores depicting the distance to parity on a scale of zero to one hundred, the 2022 Report found the average distance completed to parity was 68 per cent. With the present trajectory, it will take 132 years to close the gender gap and 151 years to achieve equal economic participation and opportunity (World Economic Forum, 2022 ). Moreover, these estimates are predicted to worsen as the world faces crises in politics, economics, health, food, and the environment. Now more than ever we must assess our successes and failures in attempting to reduce gender inequality and discrimination.

The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesise evidence of the effectiveness of social justice interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women and girls. Because recent systematic reviews have examined the effectiveness of interventions targeting violence against women and sexuality (e.g. Karakurt et al., 2019 ; Bourey et al., 2015 ; Yakubovich et al., 2018 ) we did not include these types of interventions. We were unable, however, to identify systematic reviews examining other interventions targeting gender equality. Therefore, this review focused on interventions that sought to achieve gender equality in any political, social, cultural or economic context, except violence against women and sexuality.

Theoretical Framework

The truism ‘context matters’ is pertinent to this systematic review. According to contextual social psychology, effects brought about at a microlevel are modified by the mesolevel and macrolevel, and vice versa (Pettigrew, 2021 ). In this review, microlevel variables include individual characteristics, including biology, beliefs, behaviours, values, and emotions, such as empathy and resentment. Mesolevel contextual factors include interpersonal interactions in family, work, and school etc. (e.g. gender segregation), and macrolevel context includes broader social and cultural norms, including religion and politics. Social norms in this context are “rules of action shared by people in a given society or group; they define what is considered normal and acceptable behaviour for the members of that group” (Cislaghi & Heise, 2020 , p. 409). In this sense, social norms exist within the mind, while gender norms exist outside it, and both are produced and reproduced through social interaction. In contextual social psychology, beliefs are embedded in institutions that affect our relational behaviours. While there are psychological causes of macrophenomena (Pettigrew, 2021 ), these phenomena (such as patriarchy) also influence individual affect. For example, affirmative action laws (macro) should increase contact between genders (meso), which in turn should reduce individual prejudice (micro). While this is a top down example, it also works from the bottom up, whereby micro behaviours can affect macrophenomena. In this context, prejudice against women and girls is a “multilevel syndrome” (Pettigrew, 2021 , p. 74).

“Systems thinking” also recognises the intersection between problems and processes from local to global levels (Arnold & Wade, 2015 ). Systems thinking is a complex interplay of a multitude of constantly evolving factors (Banerjee & Lowalekar, 2021 ). According to systems thinking, gender equality will be realised when interventions at the micro, meso and macrolevel are configured holistically, rather than individualistically. Interventions at any level need to consider and accommodate the role of processes and factors that may support or hinder the effectiveness of the intervention to yield population benefits. The different contextual levels that impact on gender inequality may be successfully tackled by feminist movements, but integrating the interventions pluralistically rather than monistically remains elusive as feminist movements appear to continue to work in silos. In undertaking strategies across different contexts, however, we are more likely to achieve substantive equality. But we need to address this complexity in the three contextual levels (micro, meso, macro) in order to predict, modify and eliminate discrimination against women and girls. These theoretical frameworks are used throughout this review to aid the synthesis of the evidence and identification of implications for practice.

Review Design

The Sample, Phenomena of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type (SPIDER) tool was used to design the review (Cooke et al., 2012 ). SPIDER is appropriate for systematic reviews of quantitative, qualitative, and multi-methods research. We use the term multi method rather than mixed method because mixed method studies could be considered to have used multiple methods of data collection/analysis, but not all multi-methods studies follow “mixed methods” procedures as they do not always provide an integrated synthesis of findings across the methods used (Creswell, 2009 ). The search terms are documented in Supplementary Tables 1 and 2. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al., 2021 ). Rapid review methods were used for citation screening and data extraction (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ). Papers were eligible according to the criteria defined below.

The sample could include people of any age, race, or gender in local, global, or transboundary intervention contexts. The phenomena of interest included any social justice, cognitive or behaviour-change interventions that sought to reduce gender inequality, gender bias, or discrimination against women, with any mode of delivery and duration. Interventions could be any type of program (e.g. behaviour change), policy (e.g. gender mainstreaming), process (e.g. awareness raising) or experimental condition that aimed to influence gender-focused outcomes. An intervention was categorised as achieving its aim (e.g., having a beneficial effect on gender equality or reducing discrimination), partially achieving its aim, not achieving its aim according to the assessment in the paper (i.e. if the analyses in the respective paper found that the intervention did not work), or having a harmful effect (i.e. resulting in increased discrimination or inequality).

The intervention being investigated could have been administered by any party, including expert advocates, government or non-government organisations (NGOs), social justice enterprises, or academic researchers. The research design did not need to include a comparator or control group, but must have incorporated a between-groups or pre-post comparison, or retrospective assessment of the impact, feasibility or acceptability of the intervention or program. The primary outcome for evaluation was any measure of actual or perceived level of, or change in, gender (in)equality, gender bias, or discrimination against women or girls. Secondary outcomes were the perceived level of inclusion, solidarity, awareness, empowerment, or equity. The research methods could include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed- or multi-methods. Eligible papers were published in peer-reviewed journals in English from 1990 to 2022. Whilst CEDAW was adopted in 1979, this timeframe was selected to ensure contemporaneity. A protocol for the review was developed a priori, but not registered.

Search Strategy and Eligibility Screening

As this was a review of research across multiple disciplines, three databases were used: Scopus, ProQuest, and psycINFO, in addition to reviewing reference lists and recommendations by experts. Search terms were adapted to each database. After screening the first search results it was evident that the terms were not broad enough, so a second search including additional terms was undertaken (see Supplementary Tables 1 and 2 for terms of both search strategies). All search results were uploaded to Covidence for eligibility screening and duplicate removal by reviewer one. Using Abstrackr, a second author screened a minimum of 10 percent of citations, consistent with rapid review methods (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ), or until < 50 percent of citations were predicted to be relevant. Abstrackr is a machine-learning program that generates predictions of the likely relevance of records based on judgements made by the reviewer (Wallace et al., 2012 ), which has been found to have excellent sensitivity and to generate significant workload savings (Giummarra et al., 2020 ). After titles and abstracts were screened, full text articles were assessed against the eligibility criteria, noting reasons for exclusion. Both reviewers met to discuss any conflicts; if consensus could not be reached a third author was consulted. The authors included experts in gender equality who provided significant input into the search strategy, identification of relevant literature, and synthesis.

Quality Assessment

The quality of research was assessed by the first author using a standard method (Kmet et al., 2004 ) with the added criterion of whether papers reported approval by a formally constituted human research ethics committee. Supplementary Tables 3–5 specify the quality criteria. Overall quality was classified as poor (studies meeting < 0.50 criteria), adequate (0.50–0.69), good (0.70–0.80), or strong (> 0.80) consistent with previous studies (Parsons et al., 2017 ).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted in three categories: The authors and publication year of the paper ; research aims, theoretical approach, methods, sample size, eligibility criteria, and sample characteristics; and, the intervention , aim, type, sector, geographic region, description, duration, targeted outcomes, effects, and short- and long-term impacts. Figures to summarise the proportion of studies from different geographic regions were generated using www.sankeymatic.com/build/ . Ten percent of the full-text articles were randomly selected, stratified by research method, for independent data extraction by a second author, consistent with rapid review methods (Plüddemann et al., 2018 ). The data extracted from both reviewers was cross-checked for accuracy and completeness. Sources of heterogeneity were noted, particularly variation in study samples, settings, contexts and intervention designs or aims. Given the heterogeneity of the interventions and the research, meta-analysis and meta-synthesis were not appropriate. Therefore, the findings were thematically synthesised according to intervention sector (e.g. education, employment etc.) and context (i.e., micro, meso and macro levels).

A total of 7,832 records were screened for eligibility with the last search conducted on 18 July 2022 (Fig.  1 ). Seventy-eight papers, each reporting a single intervention and using qualitative (n = 36), multi (19), or quantitative (23) methods, met the inclusion criteria. The characteristics of qualitative, quantitative, and multi-methods studies are summarised in Supplementary Tables 6, 7, and 8, respectively. The intervention effects for each study are summarised in Supplementary Tables 9 and 10.

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA) Flow Diagram

Five interventions were at the microlevel, 37 were at the mesolevel, and 17 were at the macrolevel. The final 19 interventions straddled micro-meso, meso-macro, or micro–macro. No intervention covered all three levels or took a systems thinking approach.

The overall quality of each paper is detailed in Supplementary Tables 6–8, and ratings for each quality domain are in Supplementary Tables 3–5. Studies using quantitative methods (range 0.58–1.00; median = 0.92, Q1 = 0.82, Q3 = 1.00) had significantly higher quality than qualitative (range 0.41–0.91; median = 0.73, Q1 = 0.67, Q3 = 0.79; χ2(1) = 13.71, p  < 0.001) and multi-method studies (range 0.48–0.94; median = 0.76, Q1 = 0.63, Q3 = 0.82; χ2(1) = 21.96, p  < 0.001). There was no difference in the quality of qualitative and multi-methods studies ( p  = 0.97).

All quantitative studies articulated the research question and reported the results adequately. Randomisation and blinding were used in most studies. While estimates of variance and controlling for confounding were not consistently reported, 18 studies using quantitative methods were considered to be strong quality, and seven had a perfect score.

In reports of qualitative studies, the study design, context, and conclusion were generally addressed well. However, only six studies used verification processes (see Table 1 for definition). No qualitative study received a perfect score; 20 studies were considered to be good quality.

For multi-method studies, the objective, context, data collection, analysis, and conclusion were generally reported well. Blinding was not applicable, and estimates of variance and control of confounding were generally not reported. No multi-method study received a perfect score although the quality of six of multi-methods papers was assessed as good.

Corresponding authors were contacted to confirm ethics approval; authors of two papers confirmed that the study did not receive ethics approval, and authors from 16 studies did not respond or confirm whether they had ethics approval. The omission of evidence of ethical approval is concerning and should be addressed in all future research with humans. The 18 studies with respect to which we either could not confirm ethics approval or did not receive ethics approval were all published in highly ranked journals. Furthermore, it was not, in general, clear in the majority of papers which agency or organisation conducted the intervention or undertook the study (e.g. government agency, NGO, academic researchers) making it difficult to assess reflexivity, and the prospect of future implementation.

Included Interventions

Intervention sectors.

Interventions were implemented and evaluated in various sectors: education (26 interventions); politics (10); employment (8); information, communications, and technology (6); legal (5); economics (6); health (3); sustainable development and land rights (3); sport (3); and women’s and girls’ rights (2). Interventions in the areas of conflict and of water, sanitation, and hygiene were reported in one paper each.

Intervention Settings

Interventions were set evenly throughout the Global South (35 papers) and the Global North (39 papers). Interventions were evaluated in Africa (15), Europe (12), North America (19), Asia (10), Latin America (6), the Middle East and North Africa (4), the United Kingdom (6), and the Pacific (4). Just under half of the Global South interventions were conducted in rural settings (16/35), whereas Global North interventions tended to be urban (22/39) (Fig.  2 ).

Settings for interventions in Global North and South Countries

Research Participant Characteristics

Twenty-seven interventions included both women and men as participants, 30 included only women, and one intervention included only men. Thirteen studies did not report the gender of the sample, and in seven studies gender of the sample or population was not applicable (e.g. intervention sought to affect a broad population approach irrespective of gender, such as a new law that applied to the whole population in order to improve gender equality, or a collective political party that sought to influence gender issues in parliament). Thirty papers did not report other participant demographic characteristics. Where sample characteristics were reported, participants were 10–80 years of age, with education level ranging from none to post-graduate.

Study Characteristics

All papers but one (Devasia, 1998 ) were published after 2005. Most papers reported data gathered across years, with twelve interventions taking place over hours or weeks. The timeframe did not appear to be associated with whether or not the intervention had a significant beneficial effect on the aims of the intervention. For example, McGregor and Davies’ ( 2019 ) two year study of the effects of a pay equity campaign achieved its aim (legislation was enacted), but Hayhurst’s ( 2014 ) girls’ entrepreneurship study that ran for several years had harmful effects (girls income was taken by men). Similarly, Zawadzki et al., ( 2012 ) board game intervention that takes 60–90 min achieved its aims but Krishnan et al. ( 2014 ) conditional cash transfer study over a month had no effect on social change.

In the qualitative and multi-method studies, theoretical frameworks were rarely reported. The few papers that did report theoretical frameworks used feminist standpoint theory, post-structuralist feminist theory, or social constructivist theory. Qualitative data collection methods were diverse: interviews (41 studies), focus groups (19), document analysis (18), observations (15), case studies (2), and visual techniques (e.g. PhotoVoice) (2). Quantitative and multi-method studies predominantly used surveys and questionnaires (22), with one study each using of the following tools: Gender Equitable Men’s Scale (Gottert et al., 2016 ), the Knowledge of Gender Equity Scale, the Empathy Questionnaire (Spreng et al., 2009 ), the Feminist Identity Scale (Rickard, 1989 ), and the Gender Related System Justification scale (Jost & Kay, 2003 ).

Few interventions aimed to achieve gender equality per se. Rather, they aimed to achieve components of gender equality (see Table 1 for definition), which ranged from gender neutrality through to striving towards a feminist revolution. Overall aims included greater awareness, inclusion, empowerment, parity, equity, and substantive equality (Supplementary Tables 6–8, column 3). The evaluation of whether interventions achieved their aims was usually assessed through surveying participants. The most common aim was to enhance “empowerment” (n = 18), which was generally not clearly defined. The interventions had various levels of effectiveness, with 37 studies having a significant beneficial effect on the aim of the intervention (i.e., they achieved their aims); 31 having a partial beneficial impact on the aim of the intervention; four studies having no beneficial or harmful impact on the aim of the intervention; and six studies having a harmful effect on the aim of the intervention (e.g., the intervention led to increased discrimination, inequality, or abuse). Examples of harmful effects include the ‘Girl Effect’ program in Uganda which resulted in participants being abused or robbed of the money they had earned (Hayhurst, 2014 ), and a girls’ resiliency program in the USA that resulted in increased abuse from male peers (Brinkman et al., 2011 ).

Intervention Design and Effectiveness by Sector

Education and training interventions.

Evaluations of education and training interventions were reported in 18 papers (6 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 6 multi-methods). Education interventions covered a range contexts (3 micro-meso, 11 meso, 3 meso-macro, 1 macro). Most interventions (14) used awareness-raising workshops targeting individual change, and reported only partially achieving the aim of the interventions. Five workshops were assessed in randomised controlled trials. Two qualitative studies targeted increasing girls’ enrolment in formal education in Morocco (Eger et al., 2018 ) and India (Jain & Singh, 2017 ), both of which achieved the aims of the interventions. One qualitative study in the Democratic Republic of Congo targeted behaviour change in men only (Pierotti et al., 2018 ), which had a partial beneficial effect because men increased their willingness to contribute to household chores but maintained control over the broader gender system. This intervention was an eight-week long mesolevel men’s discussion group focused on “undoing gender” through social interaction (e.g. promoting a more equal division of labour in the household, improving intra-household relationship quality, and questioning existing gender norms).

Gender parity in schools did not signal an end to, or transformation of, gender inequities in the schools or communities studied (Ralfe, 2009 ). To bring about education policy reform, Palmén et al. ( 2020 ) found that top-down institutional commitment to gender equality was essential to create change. However, bottom-up strategies were also needed as teachers had to foster cooperative learning that encouraged working together and valuing different abilities across genders (Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ). Sufficient resources, in addition to monitoring and evaluation of education initiatives, were found to be a key to intervention success (Palmén et al., 2020 ). Ultimately, social norms did not change beyond the school environment (Chisamya et al., 2012 ; Jain & Singh, 2017 ).

While interventions in traditional education contexts only partially achieved their aims, experiential learning was found to be a powerful process to deliver knowledge about gender equity in a nonthreatening way (Zawadzki et al., 2012a ). Zawadzki’s study was a mesolevel intervention that used a board game to teach participants the cumulative effect of subtle, nonconscious bias, to discuss how bias hinders women’s promotion in the workplace, and to find solutions for what can be done to reduce that bias. They found that the delivery of information was less effective when new knowledge did not promote self-efficacy or lead participants to resist perceived attempts to influence their beliefs or behaviours. Furthermore, they established that learning about gender inequity was not sufficient for knowledge retention. Rather, participants had to link the knowledge to their own experiences and be empowered to feel that they could act on that knowledge.

Awareness-raising interventions in education and training generally only partially achieved the aims of the interventions, and did not necessarily translate into behaviour change (Ralfe, 2009 ). In the strong quality (0.93) quantitative mesolevel study by Moss-Racusin et al. ( 2018 ), the Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM (VIDS) intervention was found to achieve significantly greater awareness of bias in participants compared to the non-intervention control condition; however, effects on behaviour were not assessed. This intervention presented participants with short videos about findings from gender bias research in one of three conditions. One condition illustrated findings using narratives (compelling stories), the second presented the same results using expert interviews (straightforward facts), and a hybrid condition included both narrative and expert interview videos.

A lack of awareness, knowledge, or understanding of women’s human rights was found to be a key barrier to the achievement of gender equality in education-based interventions (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Gervais ( 2010 ) reported that awareness-raising can have direct effects on participants by giving them confidence to speak up against violations of their rights, although they noted that this might anger violators. Similarly, education was found in some cases to enable women to negotiate power-sharing with their husbands, while other women were verbally abused and threatened because their husbands disapproved of the education program (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Similar to the study by Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ), Murphy-Graham ( 2009 ) sought to “undo gender” by encouraging students to rethink gender relations in their everyday lives (mesolevel). Including men together with women in education programs enabled women to gauge men’s reactions to social change in a safe environment (Cislaghi et al., 2019 ). Potential harmful effects of interventions are further summarised under the ‘The problem of hostile affect’ header below.

STEM Education

Among education interventions were a subset of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) education interventions. These specifically targeted secondary school girls as a pathway to tertiary STEM education, and were reported in eight papers (1 qualitative, 3 quantitative, 4 multi methods). The design of interventions varied from science clubs, outreach programs, after school sessions, residential camps and immersion days. Archer et al. ( 2014 ), however, took a multipronged approach. Their intervention included school excursions, visits from STEM Ambassadors and a researcher-in-residence, a STEM ‘speed networking’ event, and participation in a series of teacher-led sessions for girls aged 13–14 years. Despite this significant investment, the intervention did not significantly change students’ aspirations of studying science, although it did appear to have a beneficial effect on broadening students’ understanding of the range of science jobs.

All STEM education interventions were aimed at the mesolevel and were located in the urban Global North. While the long-term impact (e.g. increased enrolment of women into tertiary STEM education) were inconsistent among studies. Gorbacheva et al. ( 2014 ) found that secondary same-sex education had no influence on this objective. Alternatively, Hughes et al. ( 2013 ) found having role models was more critical than sex segregation. Finally, Lackey et al. ( 2007 ), Lang et al. ( 2015 ) and Watermeyer ( 2012 ) all established that a network of support (e.g. family, school, industry) made a positive difference to girls equality in STEM education.

Employment Interventions

Eight interventions focused on women’s employment: 4 qualitative, 2 quantitative, 2 multi-methods studies. They covered a range of contexts (1 micro/meso, 5 meso, 2 meso/macro). Three interventions addressed women’s promotion (Eriksson‐Zetterquist & Styhre, 2008 ; Grada et al., 2015 ; Smith et al., 2015 ). Two interventions evaluated microenterprise; one produced harmful effects (Hayhurst, 2014 ), and the other only partially achieved its aim (Strier, 2010 ). Hayhurst ( 2014 ) evaluated an intervention auspiced by the Nike Foundation and concluded that it had an unfair and deleterious effect by placing the burden of social change on girls. In this intervention, focusing on the mesolevel, girls were taught to be entrepreneurs to enable them to escape abuse, buy land, grow food, and work. In practice, this economic empowerment strategy led to increased abuse by men who wanted to take the girls’ money to pay their own taxes and fines. This study was good quality (0.73). Participants in the study by Strier ( 2010 ) thought that microenterprise promised self-realisation and escape from the slavery of the labour market, but they found it to be a false promise, characterising the informal sector as both a disappointment and a fraud. Overall, employment interventions led to unreliable and inconsistent outcomes.

Economic Interventions

Six interventions (1 qualitative, 2 quantitative, 3 multi-methods studies) addressed various contexts (1 micro, 1 micro/macro, 2 meso/macro, 2 macro interventions) that targeted economic empowerment. Overall, the interventions partially achieved their aims. For microfinance interventions, women benefited less than men because they were given smaller loans for less lucrative businesses (Haase, 2012 ). Krishnan et al. ( 2014 ) conducted a good quality (0.79) multi-method study of a micro–macro level intervention that provided conditional cash transfers in India, and found minimal positive effects from the implementation of this scheme to address social behaviours related to valuing girls. In this study, parents had to register the birth of their daughter in order to receive financial benefit, but this did not transform the social mindset that daughters are a burden. In another study, the size and frequency of cash transfers directly influenced outcomes: large but infrequent payments enabled investment that could facilitate economic transformation (Morton, 2019 ). Lump-sum payments also challenged stereotypes about what women could invest in, and could transform the gender asset gap. Institution of a social protection floor (e.g. welfare benefits) enhanced women’s power and control over household decision-making in financial matters and household spending in South Africa (Patel et al., 2013 ). While a social protection floor had benefits for women’s empowerment at the microlevel, it did not transform unequal and unjust gendered social relations of power at the macrolevel.

Legal Interventions

Five interventions (3 qualitative, 2 quantitative studies) in two contexts (1 meso/macro, 4 macro) reported on legal interventions. In Zartaloudis’s ( 2015 ) qualitative macrolevel study of an employment strategy in Greece and Portugal, legislation was found to have an important but not transformative effect on gender equality in employment. Three other studies found that changes in law must be accompanied by incentives and penalties in order to be effective (Kim & Kang, 2016 ; Palmén et al., 2020 ; Singh & Peng, 2010 ). While the decline in levels of discrimination was at first sharp after enacting anti-discrimination legislation, its implementation plateaued over time, calling into question the long-term sustainable effects of law reform without adequate enforcement mechanisms. In this macrolevel study by Singh and Peng ( 2010 ), the Ontario Pay Equity Act was effective because it was proactive in persuing pay equity, rather than being complaint based.

Legal opportunity and litigation were strategic choices in campaign strategies in one study, playing an important role in effecting change to prevent discriminatory pay for work typically performed by women (McGregor & Davies, 2019 ). The strong quality (0.92) macrolevel study by Mueller et al. ( 2019 ) increased access to legal services in order to improve legal knowledge in rural Tanzania. It found that, despite increased access to legal services, women still had moderate to low knowledge of marital laws, and only 2.7 percent of women would refer someone to a paralegal for problems with a widow’s assets, divorce, or marital disputes. Mueller et al. ( 2019 ) concluded that an increased investment in access to justice needed to be made through informal channels (mesolevel change) in addition to the macrolevel law reform.

Political Interventions

Ten papers (4 qualitative, 3 quantitative, 3 multi-methods studies) that covered a variety of contexts (1 micro/meso, 2 meso, 2 meso/macro, 5 macro) reported assessments of political interventions. Electing women to council increased other women’s access to councillors because women had greater heterosocial networks (i.e., comprising women and men), but did not affect men’s access to councillors (Benstead, 2019 ; Levy & Sakaiya, 2020 ). However, increasing the number of women in public office did not necessarily improve equality (McLean & Maalsen, 2017 ). For example, an evaluation of gendered outcomes of Hon. Julia Gillard’s tenure as Prime Minister of Australia saw increased gender-based denigration and vilification of her leadership (McLean & Maalsen, 2017 ).

A qualitative macro study using interviews and ethnography to explore the impact of political gender quotas in Mali (Johnson, 2019 ) found that savings groups, together with political gender quotas, were important for catalysing the first steps towards social and political transformation. In Mali, gender quota laws required political parties to field a minimum of 30 percent women candidates, and to include a woman within the first three places on a party’s candidate list. In this context, savings and credit associations developed women’s self-efficacy and increased their confidence to become political candidates (Johnson, 2019 ).

An example of discursive change based on political activism was found by Cowell-Meyers’ ( 2017 ) multi-method study examining the impact of a new feminist political party in Sweden. Near consensus by political parties that gender equality needed to be tackled through government intervention was achieved through the efforts of the small women’s rights party. However, another multi-method mesolevel study examining the effects of Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs) in Europe found that they either ignored or subverted gender mainstreaming language (S. Lang, 2009 ). Gender mainstreaming policy interventions were found to have only partially achieved their aims, but were successful when law and policy detailed specific roles and responsibilities for action (Kim & Kang, 2016 ). Policymakers in two other studies were found to avoid the responsibility of implementation not because they opposed gender mainstreaming itself, but because they objected to being forced into it (Hwang & Wu, 2019 ; Kim & Kang, 2016 ). Therefore, the attitude of bureaucrats (microlevel) was considered to be an important factor in implementing gender equality initiatives at the macrolevel.

The strong (perfect quality score) quantitative study by Saguy and Szekeres ( 2018 ) reported on the effect on gender-based attitudes (microlevel) following exposure to the 2017 Women’s March across the US and worldwide in response to Donald Trump’s inauguration. The research found that large-scale collective action had a polarising effect on those exposed to it. Over time, men who identified more closely with their own gender increased the degree to which they justified gender inequality after exposure to the protests, suggesting a backlash reaction (mesolevel). People who were found to be positively affected by collective action were already in favour of the protesters’ cause. The backlash found for high-identifying men was explained by reactance theory (Brehm, 1966 ) whereby people become motivationally aroused by a threat to or elimination of a behavioral freedom (Brehm, 1989 ).

Barriers to Achieving Gender Equality: The Problem of Hostile Affect

No study accounted for men’s and boys’ emotions (microlevel change) as part of the aim and design of the intervention, but their significance became apparent in the results of several studies. Men and boys reported feeling hostility, resentment, fear and jealousy when social norms were challenged. Attempts at addressing gender inequality were found to threaten men’s sense of entitlement, and it was theorised that boys expected to be the centre of attention (Brinkman et al., 2011 ). In the meso study by MacPhail et al. ( 2019 ) that evaluated a men’s participation program in South Africa, participants reported equality as a zero-sum game that meant respecting women equated to disrespecting men. In that intervention, activities included intensive small group workshops, informal community dialogue through home visits, mural painting to stimulate discussions of key messages, informal theatre, soccer tournaments, and film screenings. In another study, women’s oppression was maintained by men because they feared losing control of ‘their’ women (Devasia, 1998 ). In several studies, men shared their fear of being perceived as weak or feminine in front of their peers or community (Bigler et al., 2019 ; McCarthy & Moon, 2018 ; Murphy-Graham, 2009 ; Pierotti et al., 2018 ; Singhal & Rattine-Flaherty, 2006 ). Male participants in the study by Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ) believed that allowing women to be leaders in households would disintegrate society. They believed that upholding men’s lack of accountability and position as ‘boss’ was important to maintaining the fabric of society.

In contrast, Cislaghi ( 2018 ) found that men in Senegal did not resist increased political participation of women. And a radio program in Afghanistan that addressed gender equality was found not to offend men’s cultural or religious beliefs, and ultimately succeeded in changing attitudes and behaviours towards women and girls (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). The outcome included changes in the community, such as giving permission to women to leave their home alone, to vote, to go to school, and to reject child marriage. While participants expressed increased empowerment (micro), they also acknowledged that they may have their rights, but can never make decisions pertaining to their rights (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). For example, women may have the right to vote (macro), but they cannot go to vote or decide who to vote for without male guardianship (meso). In that study, 15 h of civic education material was promoted by radio, focusing on peace, democracy, and women’s rights. At the community level, interviews and focus groups with participants revealed that there was no resistance to listening to the radio program from men or families. However, the Sengupta et al. study was not longitudinal and had a relatively small sample of 115 people (72.2% women), and the women in the study may not have been in a position that allowed them to admonish the men in their community.

It was found in one study that resistance and backlash can be ameliorated by including men and boys in the development and delivery of interventions (Sengupta et al., 2007 ). Behaviour change in men required an increase in empathy to achieve the aim of gender equality (Becker & Swim, 2011 ). Hadjipavlou ( 2006 ) and Vachhani and Pullen (2019) found that empathy was a viable alternative feminist strategy. In their qualitative study, Hwang and Wu ( 2019 ) in Taiwan found that trust-building between civil servants and advocates reduced resistance and hostility. Activists in this intervention used four strategies: (1) Giving praise and encouragement instead of criticism and blame; (2) Engaging civil servants on a personal level to create bonding; (3) Appeasing fears about being blamed by offering assistance; (4) Attempting to invoke their identification with the values of gender mainstreaming through informal educational efforts, all of which are mesolevel strategies.

Promoting Social Change to Reduce Gender Inequality

There was a wide array of types of change in different aspects of gender equality, with interventions varying in their success across settings and contexts. Table 2 summarises the types of change (e.g. legal, financial, behaviour, social) and the context (i.e., micro, meso, macro) that were identified and whether interventions aims were fully or partially achieved, or were not achieved, or had a harmful effect. Physical change, such as increased physical presence of women through inclusion or solidarity (meso) was the most consistently achieved beneficial outcome. Interventions targeting macrolevel social change, however, predominantly failed to achieve their aims or had harmful effects, reflecting how hard it is to realise social change, especially from a single, usually localised, intervention. Quotas could perhaps achieve their aim, although this finding was derived mostly from one good quality study (Johnson, 2019 ). The largest group of interventions were those implemented in education-based contexts, but these generally only partially achieved their aims, and focused mostly on physical changes (e.g., inclusion, solidarity). Most gender mainstreaming interventions did not achieved their aims.

Altogether, the findings confirm that social transformation is not automatic, easy, nor necessarily sustainable (Murphy-Graham, 2009 ). Furthermore, economic transformation is constrained if it is not supported by concurrent social transformation (Haase, 2012 ). One researcher, reporting a good quality meso-macro multi-method educational study in rural Bangladesh, claimed to have achieved social transformation (Sperandio, 2011 ). The appointment of women into roles that are traditionally occupied by men (in this case, teaching) led to widespread acceptance and normalisation of women in other non-traditional roles in a conservative village. Because the researcher did not interview or survey members of the community in which the intervention was evaluated, it is not clear whether broader social change was achieved.

It was found in several studies that dialogue was key to creating change in gender norms (Hwang & Wu, 2019 ; MacPhail et al., 2019 ; McGregor & Davies, 2019 ; Murphy-Graham, 2009 ; Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ). However, Matich et al.’s ( 2019 ) qualitative study of the #freethenipple campaign and Boling’s ( 2020 ) study of the #ShePersisted campaign found that small steps bring about only small changes. For instance, in the #freethenipple campaign, women took control of how they were represented (microlevel) in order to challenge patriarchal gender norms (macrolevel). The authors noted that, despite good intentions, a hashtag cannot erase stereotyping. Pierotti et al. ( 2018 ) also found that small changes (micro) in quotidian tasks (e.g., participation in household chores) did not lead to substantive social change (macrolevel change). That is, while changes in tasks occurred with relative ease, social transformation through the cumulative effect of small steps towards egalitarianism did not occur.

In comparison, the qualitative study by McCarthy and Moon ( 2018 ) examined a women’s program in Ghana and found that changing everyday practices did matter, but becoming cognisant of the need for revolution led people to become overwhelmed and immune to change efforts. The researchers found that a key challenge in achieving social transformation was the need to bring about changes in daily interactions. For instance, one participant stated that if a person is not empowered at home, no matter how much money you give them, they are going to need more (McCarthy & Moon, 2018 ).

All genders need to participate to achieve a re-socialisation (Brinkman et al., 2011 ). Sengupta et al. ( 2007 ) concluded that their radio program would have alienated men if it had targeted only women. By including all genders, potential resistance to change can be neutralised (Devasia, 1998 ). In summary, social transformation is possible, but transformation is not likely to be universal or successful across all contexts (Sánchez-Hernández et al., 2018 ), particularly from any single monistic intervention. Holistic responses that take account of system thinking may create the change needed.

Overall, despite concerted effort, it seems that in the past thirty years we have not uncovered the keys to social change in order to enhance gender equality and non-discrimination against girls and women. Perhaps the reviewed interventions did not achieve macrolevel change because they did not simultaneously and explicitly address meso and micro change. Whilst CEDAW seeks the ‘elimination of all forms of discrimination’, achievement of that aim is far from complete, although it is not surprising that no single intervention could catalyse social change that achieves CEDAW’s objective. This review demonstrates that it will take time and a variety of endeavours to achieve gender equality.

To summarise the substantive lessons from this systematic review, we offer the following distillation as a summary of the findings to date. This distillation includes definitive statements that should be viewed only in the context of this review and may not generalise across all efforts towards gender equality in all societies.

What is Ineffective in Promoting Gender Equality

Small changes do not lead to big changes. Small concessions are granted to maintain peace, while big changes are often denied to maintain power.

Men and boys can feel the micro effects of fear, hostility, resentment, and jealousy when meso-macro gendered social norms are challenged.

Increased confidence, agency, empowerment, or individual leadership (micro) is not sufficient to promote the structural changes required to increase gender equality (macro).

A lack of change in mindsets (micro) and poor enforcement can mean that laws (macro) are not realised or have little effect at the community level (meso).

The overall focus on women ignores the real problem, and the need to engage with all members of society.

Education and awareness-raising may establish the right to education but do not necessarily create gender equality.

Raising awareness alone does not translate into behaviour change (meso to micro).

Transnational advocacy networks are not effective.

Protests in western democracies can have a polarising and backlash effect.

Gender mainstreaming efforts generally fail to achieve positive outcomes.

Economic transformation does not automatically lead to social transformation.

What is Effective in Promoting Gender Equality

Eliciting positive affect in interventions garners positive outcomes.

Empathy is a viable feminist strategy, although evidence is limited.

All genders need to participate in re-socialisation of gender norms.

Dialogue is a key to success.

A large number of women must behave differently for new behaviours to be accepted (micro to meso).

Experiential learning is a powerful way to embed knowledge about gender equity in a nonthreatening, lasting way.

Investment in access to justice must include informal channels of the justice system.

Social transformation can be achieved in households through daily interactions (meso to macro).

Enabling environments (macro) are more effective than individual empowerment (micro), but should include top-down and bottom-up approaches.

Quotas are effective.

Laws must be proactive as well as reactive or complaint based.

The contextual levels of analysis developed by Pettigrew ( 2021 ) has also been adapted from these lists into Fig. 3 . These distillations challenge our thinking about how to achieve gender equality and therefore require greater discussion amongst feminist activists, advocates, and the general population for ecological validation. The key findings of this review have implications for policy and practice because they call into question the type of change sought by feminist movements, the type of intervention used to achieve that change, and whether that intervention is likely to be effective in practice. Overall, this review gives pause for thought. We hope it will inform future decisions about how to achieve gender equality.

Contextual levels of analysis for this review, adapted from Pettigrew ( 2021 )

Strengths and Limitations

Our broad inclusion criteria identified relevant interventions across a range of political, economic, social and cultural contexts, published over a thirty year period. Consistent with the recommendations by Garritty et al. ( 2021 ) we used rapid review methods; this may have led to the omission of some eligible studies. However, the use of a machine learning approach by reviewer two to rapidly screen a sample of the records predicted to be most relevant helped to limit the omission of relevant studies. Moreover, our restriction of literature to 1990 onwards may have omitted some studies conducted since the adoption of CEDAW in 1979. Given that only one study was published from 1990–2000, however, it is unlikely that this restricted timeframe had a significant impact on the review. Excluding papers not published in English is a limitation, and may have led to the omission of studies in some settings. We urge those who have non-peer-reviewed evaluations to submit them to peer-reviewed journals for future inclusion in reviews like the present one. The results of the large number of studies included in the review are difficult to generalise given the heterogenous study methods, intervention designs, populations, and settings. Because of a lack of reflexivity in most qualitative and multi-method studies, it is impossible to discern (for example) whether research undertaken in the Global South was conducted by Global North researchers. Moreover, there was no evidence of the ethical conduct of 16 studies and two studies did not have ethics approval. Together, these limitations may indicate potential problems with informed consent and implicit racial or other biases, although none were explicitly identifiable. There was insufficient evidence to assess whether and how culture played a part in attempts to achieve gender equality. Furthermore, while 86 percent of interventions predominantly or partially achieved their aims, this may inflate the effectiveness of such interventions because of reporting biases that favour publication of positive results (Sengupta et al., 2007 ; Sperandio, 2011 ).

This review has taken stock of successes and failures in seeking to promote gender equality. The findings reveal that undue reliance has been placed on the presumed efficacy of awareness raising, and that the race to achieve gender parity has not yet catalysed the desired social transformation. Entrepreneur programs can be exploitative, and legal actions have had limited effects, potentially failing because of men’s feelings about change. This review has shown that men can be fearful, resentful, jealous, and angry towards acts that disrupt the status quo . Until we adequately address these emotions and biases, the change that women (and potentially all genders) want, and the equality we all need will not be realised. Social context and systems thinking have shown us the importance of holism when tackling systemic discrimination. In this context, to be fully human is to be emotionally fulfilled. Ergo , human rights will be realised when there is dignity, humanity and positive emotionality among genders. Only then is the promise of CEDAW likely to be fulfilled.

Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Dillon, J. (2014). ‘It didn’t really change my opinion’: Exploring what works, what doesn’t and why in a school science, technology, engineering and mathematics careers intervention. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32 (1), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2013.865601

Article   Google Scholar  

Arnold, R. D., & Wade, J. P. (2015). A definition of systems thinking: A systems approach. Procedia Computer Science, 44 , 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.050

Banerjee, D., & Lowalekar, H. (2021). Communicating for change: A systems thinking approach. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34 (5), 1018–1035. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-10-2020-0325

Becker, J. C., & Swim, J. K. (2011). Seeing the unseen: Attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35 (2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684310397509

Benstead, L. J. (2019). Do female local councilors improve women’s representation? The Journal of the Middle East and Africa, 10 (2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520844.2019.1580085

Bigler, C., Amacker, M., Ingabire, C., & Birachi, E. (2019). A view of the transformation of Rwanda’s highland through the lens of gender: A mixed-method study about unequal dependents on a mountain system and their well-being. Journal of Rural Studies, 69 , 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.05.001

Boling, K. S. (2020). #ShePersisted, Mitch: A memetic critical discourse analysis on an attempted Instagram feminist revolution. Feminist Media Studies, 20 (7), 966–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1620821

Bourey, C., Williams, W., Bernstein, E. E., & Stephenson, R. (2015). Systematic review of structural interventions for intimate partner violence in low- and middle-income countries: Organizing evidence for prevention. BMC Public Health, 15 , 62.

Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance . Academic Press.

Google Scholar  

Brehm, J. W. (1989). Psychological Reactance: Theory and Applications. Advances in Consumer Research, 16 (1), 72–75. Retrieved from https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=bth&AN=6487682&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s8849760

Brinkman, B. G., Brinkman, K. G., & Toomey, S. (2011). What to do about the boys? Advocating for system change when doing social justice work with girls. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 3 (2), 53–70.

Chisamya, G., DeJaeghere, J., Kendall, N., & Khan, M. A. (2012). Gender and education for all: Progress and problems in achieving gender equity. International Journal of Educational Development, 32 (6), 743–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.10.004

Cislaghi, B. (2018). The story of the “now-women”: Changing gender norms in rural West Africa. Development in Practice, 28 (2), 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2018.1420139

Cislaghi, B., Denny, E. K., Cissé, M., Gueye, P., Shrestha, B., Shrestha, P. N., & Clark, C. J. (2019). Changing social norms: The importance of “organized diffusion” for scaling up community health promotion and women empowerment interventions. Prevention Science, 20 (6), 936–946. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-00998-3

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cislaghi, B., & Heise, L. (2020). Gender norms and social norms: Differences, similarities and why they matter in prevention science. Sociology of Health & Illness, 42 (2), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13008

Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22 (10), 1435–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cowell-Meyers, K. (2017). The contagion effects of the feminist initiative in Sweden: Agenda-setting, niche parties and mainstream parties. Scandinavian Political Studies, 40 (4), 481–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12097

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches . Sage.

Devasia, L. (1998). Safe drinking water and its acquisition: Rural women’s participation in water management in Maharashtra, India. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 14 (4), 537.

Eger, C., Miller, G., & Scarles, C. (2018). Gender and capacity building: A multi-layered study of empowerment. World Development, 106 , 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.01.024

Eriksson-Zetterquist, U., & Styhre, A. (2008). Overcoming the glass barriers: Reflection and action in the ‘Women to the Top’ programme. Gender, Work & Organization, 15 (2), 133–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00366.x

Facio, A., & Morgan, M. (2009). Equity or equality for women? Understanding CEDAW’s equality principles . Springer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., King, V. J., Hamel, C., Kamel, C., & Stevens, A. (2021). Cochrane rapid reviews methods group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130 , 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007

Gervais, C. (2010). From discovery to dissidence: Honduran women's conceptions and claims of human rights. Journal of International Women's Studies, 11 , 19+. Retrieved from https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A247222961/AONE?u=monash&sid=AONE&xid=4fe4737c

Giummarra, M. J., Lau, G., & Gabbe, B. J. (2020). Evaluation of text mining to reduce screening workload for injury-focused systematic reviews. Injury Prevention, 26 (1), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2019-043247

Gorbacheva, E., Craig, A., Beekhuyzen, J., & Coldwell-Neilson, J. (2014). ICT Interventions for girls: Factors influencing ICT career intentions. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 18 (3), 864. https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v18i3.1103

Gottert, A., Barrington, C., Pettifor, A., McNaughton-reyes, H. L., Maman, S., Macphail, C., & Lippman, S. A. (2016). Measuring men’s gender norms and gender role conflict/stress in a high HIV-prevalence South African setting. AIDS and Behavior, 20 (8), 1785–1795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-016-1374-1

Grada, A. O., Caitríona Ní, L., Linehan, C., Boylan, G., & Connolly, L. (2015). Naming the parts: A case-study of a gender equality initiative with academic women. Gender in Management, 30 (5), 358–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-09-2013-0118

Haase, D. (2012). Revolution, interrupted: Gender and microfinance in Nicaragua. Critical Sociology, 38 (2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920511404443

Hadjipavlou, M. (2006). No permission to cross: Cypriot women’s dialogue across the divide. Gender, Place & Culture, 13 (4), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690600808429

Hayhurst, L. M. C. (2014). The ‘Girl Effect’ and martial arts: Social entrepreneurship and sport, gender and development in Uganda. Gender, Place & Culture, 21 (3), 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2013.802674

Hughes, R. M., Nzekwe, B., & Molyneaux, K. J. (2013). The Single Sex Debate for Girls in Science: A Comparison Between two informal science programs on middle school students’ STEM identity formation. Research in Science Education, 43 (5), 1979–2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9345-7

Hwang, S.-L., & Wu, W.-T. (2019). Social capital and feminist power: Promoting gender mainstreaming in Taiwan. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 21 (5), 724–745. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616742.2019.1606724

IDOS. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.idos-research.de/en/the-current-column/article/from-gender-parity-to-gender-equality-changing-womens-lived-realities/

Jain, S., & Singh, S. (2017). Prerna: Engendering empowerment through girl education. The International Journal of Educational Management, 31 (4), 518–529. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2016-0061

Johnson, C. E. (2019). Why rural Malian women want to be candidates for local office: Changes in social and political life and the arrival of a gender quota. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 57 (3), 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X19000296

Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2003). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. In . Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis.

Karakurt, G., Koç, E., Çetinsaya, E. E., Ayluçtarhan, Z., & Bolen, S. (2019). Meta-analysis and systematic review for the treatment of perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 105 , 220–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.08.006

Kim, D.-S., & Kang, M. (2016). Rapid growth—What’s next for gender mainstreaming? Analyzing the gender impact assessment system in Korea. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 37 (2), 168–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2016.1152875

Kmet, L. M., Cook, L. S., & Lee, R. C. (2004). Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields . Retrieved from Edmonton: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR), AHFMR - HTA Initiative #13. 2004, 1–22

Krishnan, A., Amarchand, R., Byass, P., Pandav, C., & Ng, N. (2014). “No one says ‘No’ to money” - A mixed methods approach for evaluating conditional cash transfer schemes to improve girl children’s status in Haryana, India. International Journal for Equity in Health, 13 , 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-13-11

Lackey, J. F., Borkin, S. S., Torti, V., Welnetz, T., & Moberg, D. P. (2007). Behind the findings: Yes, the science explorations program worked, but why? Curator: The Museum Journal, 50 (3), 319–340.

Lang, C., Fisher, J., Craig, A., & Forgasz, H. (2015). Outreach programmes to attract girls into computing: How the best laid plans can sometimes fail. Computer Science Education, 25 (3), 257–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1067008

Lang, S. (2009). Assessing advocacy: European transnational women’s networks and gender mainstreaming. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 16 (3), 327–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxp016

Levy, H. I., & Sakaiya, S. (2020). Effect of deliberation style on the gender gap in deliberative participation. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 21 (3), 158–175. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109920000055

MacPhail, C., Khoza, N., Treves-Kagan, S., Selin, A., Gómez-Olivé, X., Peacock, D., & Pettifor, A. (2019). Process elements contributing to community mobilization for HIV risk reduction and gender equality in rural South Africa. PLoS One . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225694

Matich, M., Ashman, R., & Parsons, E. (2019). #freethenipple – digital activism and embodiment in the contemporary feminist movement. Consumption Markets & Culture, 22 (4), 337–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2018.1512240

McCarthy, L., & Moon, J. (2018). Disrupting the gender institution: Consciousness-raising in the cocoa value chain. Organization Studies, 39 (9), 1153–1177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840618787358

McGregor, J., & Davies, S. G. (2019). Achieving pay equity: Strategic mobilization for substantive equality in Aotearoa New Zealand. Gender, Work & Organization, 26 (5), 619–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12253

McLean, J., & Maalsen, S. (2017). ‘We don’t want it to be like that for her again’: Gendered leadership and online feminism in Australian politics and planning. Australian Planner, 54 (1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2017.1297316

Morton, G. D. (2019). The power of lump sums: Using maternity payment schedules to reduce the gender asset gap in households reached by Brazil’s Bolsa Família conditional cash transfer. World Development, 113 , 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.012

Moss-Racusin, C. A., Pietri, E., Hennes, E., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V., & Roussos, G. (2018). Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24 (2), 236–260.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mueller, V., Peterman, A., Billings, L., & Wineman, A. (2019). Exploring impacts of community-based legal aid on intrahousehold gender relations in Tanzania. Feminist Economics, 25 (2), 116–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2018.1554906

Murphy-Graham, E. (2009). Constructing a new vision: Undoing gender through secondary education in Honduras. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, 55 (5/6), 503–521. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40608075

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372 , n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Palmén, R., Arroyo, L., Müller, J., Reidl, S., Caprile, M., & Unger, M. (2020). Integrating the gender dimension in teaching, research content and knowledge and technology transfer: Validating the EFFORTI evaluation framework through three case studies in Europe. Evaluation and Program Planning, 79 , 101751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101751

Parsons, D., Cordier, R., Vaz, S., & Lee, H. C. (2017). Parent-mediated intervention training delivered remotely for children with autism spectrum disorder living outside of urban areas: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19 (8), 45. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6651

Patel, L., Hochfeld, T., & Moodley, J. (2013). Gender and child sensitive social protection in South Africa. Development Southern Africa, 30 (1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2012.755872

Pettigrew, T. F. (2021). Contextual social psychology: Reanalysing prejudice, voting and intergroup contact . American Psychological Association.

Pierotti, R. S., Lake, M., & Lewis, C. (2018). Equality on his terms: Doing and undoing gender through men’s discussion groups. Gender & Society, 32 (4), 540–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243218779779

Plüddemann, A., Aronson, J. K., Onakpoya, I., Heneghan, C., & Mahtani, K. R. (2018). Redefining rapid reviews: A flexible framework for restricted systematic reviews. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, 23 (6), 201. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110990

Ralfe, E. (2009). Policy: Powerful or pointless? An exploration of the role of critical literacy in challenging and changing gender stereotypes. The Language Learning Journal, 37 (3), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730903208470

Rickard, K. M. (1989). The relationship of self-monitored dating behaviors to level of feminist identity on the Feminist Identity Scale. Sex Roles, 20 (3), 213.

Saguy, T., & Szekeres, H. (2018). Changing minds via collective action: Exposure to the 2017 Women’s March predicts decrease in (some) men’s gender system justification over time. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21 (5), 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217750475

Sánchez-Hernández, N., Martos-García, D., Soler, S., & Flintoff, A. (2018). Challenging gender relations in PE through cooperative learning and critical reflection. Sport, Education and Society, 23 (8), 812–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1487836

Sengupta, A., Long, E. G., Singhal, A., & Shefner-Rogers, C. L. (2007). The Sada says `We women have our rights’: A gender analysis of an ICT initiative in Afghanistan. International Communication Gazette, 69 (4), 335–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048507079006

Singh, P., & Peng, P. (2010). Canada’s bold experiment with pay equity. Gender in Management, 25 (7), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011081374

Singhal, A., & Rattine-Flaherty, E. (2006). Pencils and photos as tools of communicative research and praxis: Analyzing Minga Perú’s quest for social justice in the Amazon. International Communication Gazette, 68 (4), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048506065764

Smith, J. L., Handley, I. M., Zale, A. V., Rushing, S., & Potvin, M. A. (2015). Now Hiring! Empirically testing a three-step intervention to increase faculty gender diversity in STEM. BioScience, 65 (11), 1084–1087. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/90007459

Sperandio, J. (2011). Context and the gendered status of teachers: Women’s empowerment through leadership of non-formal schooling in rural Bangladesh. Gender and Education, 23 (2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540251003674097

Spreng, R. N., McKinnon, M. C., Mar, R. A., & Levine, B. (2009). The Toronto empathy questionnaire: Scale development and initial validation of a factor-analytic solution to multiple empathy measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91 (1), 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802484381

Strier, R. (2010). Women, poverty, and the microenterprise: Context and discourse. Gender, Work & Organization, 17 (2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00486.x

Techtarget. (2022). Retrieved from https://www.techtarget.com/searchcio/definition/qualitative-data#:~:text=Qualitative%20data%20is%20information%20that,graph%20databases%2C%20timelines%20and%20infographics

UNESCO. (2003). Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/en/glossary-term/gender-equity

UNICEF. (2017). Gender Equality: glossary of terms and concepts.

United Nations. (1997). Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997. A/52/3.18 .

University of Warwick. (2022). Retrieved from https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/ces/research/current/socialtheory/maps/reflexivity/

Wallace, B. C., Small, K., Brodley, C. E., Lau, J., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2012). Deploying an interactive machine learning system in an evidence-based practice center: abstrackr . Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium, Miami, Florida, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2110363.2110464

Watermeyer, R. (2012). Confirming the legitimacy of female participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM): Evaluation of a UK STEM initiative for girls. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 33 (5), 679–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2012.678751

World Economic Forum. (2022). The Global Gender Gap Report . Retrieved from https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2022.pdf

Yakubovich, A. R. M., Stöckl, H. P., Murray, J. P., Melendez-Torres, G. J. P., Steinert, J. I. M., Glavin, C. E. Y. M., & Humphreys, D. K. P. (2018). Risk and protective factors for intimate partner violence against women: Systematic review and meta-analyses of prospective–longitudinal studies. American Journal of Public Health, 108 (7), E1–E11. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304428

Zartaloudis, S. (2015). Money, empowerment and neglect - The Europeanization of gender equality promotion in Greek and Portuguese employment policies. Social Policy & Administration, 49 (4), 530–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12146

Zawadzki, M. J., Danube, C. L., & Shields, S. A. (2012). How to talk about gender inequity in the workplace: Using WAGES as an experiential learning tool to reduce reactance and promote self-efficacy. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 67 (11–12), 605–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0181-z

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. MJG was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Research Award (DE170100726). MG was supported by a Monash University Research Training Program stipend.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Central Clinical School, Monash University, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

Michaela Guthridge & Melita J. Giummarra

School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

Maggie Kirkman

Faculty of Law, Monash University, 15 Ancora Imparo Way Wellington Road, Clayton, 3800, Australia

Michaela Guthridge

Faculty of Business and Law, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, 3125, Australia

Tania Penovic

Caulfield Pain Management and Research Centre, Caulfield Hospital, 260 Kooyong Road, Caulfield, VIC, 3162, Australia

Tania Penovic & Melita J. Giummarra

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michaela Guthridge .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 202 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Guthridge, M., Kirkman, M., Penovic, T. et al. Promoting Gender Equality: A Systematic Review of Interventions. Soc Just Res 35 , 318–343 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00398-z

Download citation

Accepted : 17 August 2022

Published : 01 September 2022

Issue Date : September 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00398-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Gender equality
• Discrimination against women
• Behaviour change
• Social change
• Systematic review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

What does gender equality look like today?

Date: Wednesday, 6 October 2021

Progress towards gender equality is looking bleak. But it doesn’t need to.

A new global analysis of progress on gender equality and women’s rights shows women and girls remain disproportionately affected by the socioeconomic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, struggling with disproportionately high job and livelihood losses, education disruptions and increased burdens of unpaid care work. Women’s health services, poorly funded even before the pandemic, faced major disruptions, undermining women’s sexual and reproductive health. And despite women’s central role in responding to COVID-19, including as front-line health workers, they are still largely bypassed for leadership positions they deserve.

UN Women’s latest report, together with UN DESA, Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals: The Gender Snapshot 2021 presents the latest data on gender equality across all 17 Sustainable Development Goals. The report highlights the progress made since 2015 but also the continued alarm over the COVID-19 pandemic, its immediate effect on women’s well-being and the threat it poses to future generations.

We’re breaking down some of the findings from the report, and calling for the action needed to accelerate progress.

The pandemic is making matters worse

One and a half years since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, the toll on the poorest and most vulnerable people remains devastating and disproportionate. The combined impact of conflict, extreme weather events and COVID-19 has deprived women and girls of even basic needs such as food security. Without urgent action to stem rising poverty, hunger and inequality, especially in countries affected by conflict and other acute forms of crisis, millions will continue to suffer.

A global goal by global goal reality check:

Goal 1. Poverty

In 2021, extreme poverty is on the rise and progress towards its elimination has reversed. An estimated 435 million women and girls globally are living in extreme poverty.

And yet we can change this .

Over 150 million women and girls could emerge from poverty by 2030 if governments implement a comprehensive strategy to improve access to education and family planning, achieve equal wages and extend social transfers.

Goal 2. Zero hunger

The global gender gap in food security has risen dramatically during the pandemic, with more women and girls going hungry. Women’s food insecurity levels were 10 per cent higher than men’s in 2020, compared with 6 per cent higher in 2019.

This trend can be reversed , including by supporting women small-scale producers, who typically earn far less than men, through increased funding, training and land rights reforms.

Goal 3. Good health and well-being

Disruptions in essential health services due to COVID-19 are taking a tragic toll on women and girls. In the first year of the pandemic, there were an estimated 1.4 million additional unintended pregnancies in lower and middle-income countries.

We need to do better .

Response to the pandemic must include prioritizing sexual and reproductive health services, ensuring they continue to operate safely now and after the pandemic is long over. In addition, more support is needed to ensure life-saving personal protection equipment, tests, oxygen and especially vaccines are available in rich and poor countries alike as well as to vulnerable population within countries.

Goal 4. Quality education

A year and a half into the pandemic, schools remain partially or fully closed in 42 per cent of the world’s countries and territories. School closures spell lost opportunities for girls and an increased risk of violence, exploitation and early marriage .

Governments can do more to protect girls education .

Measures focused specifically on supporting girls returning to school are urgently needed, including measures focused on girls from marginalized communities who are most at risk.

Goal 5. Gender equality

The pandemic has tested and even reversed progress in expanding women’s rights and opportunities. Reports of violence against women and girls, a “shadow” pandemic to COVID-19, are increasing in many parts of the world. COVID-19 is also intensifying women’s workload at home, forcing many to leave the labour force altogether.

Building forward differently and better will hinge on placing women and girls at the centre of all aspects of response and recovery, including through gender-responsive laws, policies and budgeting.

Goal 6. Clean water and sanitation

In 2018, nearly 2.3 billion people lived in water-stressed countries. Without safe drinking water, adequate sanitation and menstrual hygiene facilities, women and girls find it harder to lead safe, productive and healthy lives.

Change is possible .

Involve those most impacted in water management processes, including women. Women’s voices are often missing in water management processes. 

Goal 7. Affordable and clean energy

Increased demand for clean energy and low-carbon solutions is driving an unprecedented transformation of the energy sector. But women are being left out. Women hold only 32 per cent of renewable energy jobs.

We can do better .

Expose girls early on to STEM education, provide training and support to women entering the energy field, close the pay gap and increase women’s leadership in the energy sector.

Goal 8. Decent work and economic growth

The number of employed women declined by 54 million in 2020 and 45 million women left the labour market altogether. Women have suffered steeper job losses than men, along with increased unpaid care burdens at home.

We must do more to support women in the workforce .

Guarantee decent work for all, introduce labour laws/reforms, removing legal barriers for married women entering the workforce, support access to affordable/quality childcare.

Goal 9. Industry, innovation and infrastructure

The COVID-19 crisis has spurred striking achievements in medical research and innovation. Women’s contribution has been profound. But still only a little over a third of graduates in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics field are female.

We can take action today.

 Quotas mandating that a proportion of research grants are awarded to women-led teams or teams that include women is one concrete way to support women researchers. 

Goal 10. Reduced inequalities

Limited progress for women is being eroded by the pandemic. Women facing multiple forms of discrimination, including women and girls with disabilities, migrant women, women discriminated against because of their race/ethnicity are especially affected.

Commit to end racism and discrimination in all its forms, invest in inclusive, universal, gender responsive social protection systems that support all women. 

Goal 11. Sustainable cities and communities

Globally, more than 1 billion people live in informal settlements and slums. Women and girls, often overrepresented in these densely populated areas, suffer from lack of access to basic water and sanitation, health care and transportation.

The needs of urban poor women must be prioritized .

Increase the provision of durable and adequate housing and equitable access to land; included women in urban planning and development processes.

Goal 12. Sustainable consumption and production; Goal 13. Climate action; Goal 14. Life below water; and Goal 15. Life on land

Women activists, scientists and researchers are working hard to solve the climate crisis but often without the same platforms as men to share their knowledge and skills. Only 29 per cent of featured speakers at international ocean science conferences are women.

 And yet we can change this .

Ensure women activists, scientists and researchers have equal voice, representation and access to forums where these issues are being discussed and debated. 

Goal 16. Peace, justice and strong institutions

The lack of women in decision-making limits the reach and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and other emergency recovery efforts. In conflict-affected countries, 18.9 per cent of parliamentary seats are held by women, much lower than the global average of 25.6 per cent.

This is unacceptable .

It's time for women to have an equal share of power and decision-making at all levels.

Goal 17. Global partnerships for the goals

There are just 9 years left to achieve the Global Goals by 2030, and gender equality cuts across all 17 of them. With COVID-19 slowing progress on women's rights, the time to act is now.

Looking ahead

As it stands today, only one indicator under the global goal for gender equality (SDG5) is ‘close to target’: proportion of seats held by women in local government. In other areas critical to women’s empowerment, equality in time spent on unpaid care and domestic work and decision making regarding sexual and reproductive health the world is far from target. Without a bold commitment to accelerate progress, the global community will fail to achieve gender equality. Building forward differently and better will require placing women and girls at the centre of all aspects of response and recovery, including through gender-responsive laws, policies and budgeting.

• ‘One Woman’ – The UN Women song
• UN Under-Secretary-General and UN Women Executive Director Sima Bahous
• Kirsi Madi, Deputy Executive Director for Resource Management, Sustainability and Partnerships
• Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, Deputy Executive Director for Normative Support, UN System Coordination and Programme Results
• Guiding documents
• Report wrongdoing
• Programme implementation
• Career opportunities
• Application and recruitment process
• Meet our people
• Internship programme
• Procurement principles
• Gender-responsive procurement
• Doing business with UN Women
• How to become a UN Women vendor
• Contract templates and general conditions of contract
• Vendor protest procedure
• Facts and Figures
• Global norms and standards
• Women’s movements
• Parliaments and local governance
• Constitutions and legal reform
• Preguntas frecuentes
• Global Norms and Standards
• Macroeconomic policies and social protection
• Sustainable Development and Climate Change
• Rural women
• Employment and migration
• Facts and figures
• Creating safe public spaces
• Spotlight Initiative
• Essential services
• Focusing on prevention
• Research and data
• Other areas of work
• UNiTE campaign
• Conflict prevention and resolution
• Building and sustaining peace
• Young women in peace and security
• Rule of law: Justice and security
• Women, peace, and security in the work of the UN Security Council
• Preventing violent extremism and countering terrorism
• Planning and monitoring
• Humanitarian coordination
• Crisis response and recovery
• Disaster risk reduction
• Inclusive National Planning
• Public Sector Reform
• Tracking Investments
• Strengthening young women's leadership
• Economic empowerment and skills development for young women
• Action on ending violence against young women and girls
• Engaging boys and young men in gender equality
• Sustainable development agenda
• Leadership and Participation
• National Planning
• Violence against Women
• Access to Justice
• Regional and country offices
• Regional and Country Offices
• Liaison offices
• UN Women Global Innovation Coalition for Change
• Commission on the Status of Women
• Economic and Social Council
• General Assembly
• Security Council
• High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development
• Human Rights Council
• Climate change and the environment
• Other Intergovernmental Processes
• World Conferences on Women
• Global Coordination
• Regional and country coordination
• Promoting UN accountability
• Gender Mainstreaming
• Coordination resources
• System-wide strategy
• Focal Point for Women and Gender Focal Points
• Entity-specific implementation plans on gender parity
• Laws and policies
• Strategies and tools
• Reports and monitoring
• Training Centre services
• Publications
• Government partners
• National mechanisms
• Civil Society Advisory Groups
• Benefits of partnering with UN Women
• Business and philanthropic partners
• Goodwill Ambassadors
• National Committees
• UN Women Media Compact
• UN Women Alumni Association
• Editorial series
• Media contacts
• Annual report
• Progress of the world’s women
• SDG monitoring report
• World survey on the role of women in development
• Reprint permissions
• Secretariat
• 2023 sessions and other meetings
• 2022 sessions and other meetings
• 2021 sessions and other meetings
• 2020 sessions and other meetings
• 2019 sessions and other meetings
• 2018 sessions and other meetings
• 2017 sessions and other meetings
• 2016 sessions and other meetings
• 2015 sessions and other meetings
• Compendiums of decisions
• Reports of sessions
• Key Documents
• Brief history
• CSW snapshot
• Preparations
• Official Documents
• Official Meetings
• Side Events
• Session Outcomes
• CSW65 (2021)
• CSW64 / Beijing+25 (2020)
• CSW63 (2019)
• CSW62 (2018)
• CSW61 (2017)
• Member States
• Eligibility
• Registration
• Opportunities for NGOs to address the Commission
• Communications procedure
• Grant making
• Accompaniment and growth
• Results and impact
• Knowledge and learning
• Social innovation
• UN Trust Fund to End Violence against Women
• About Generation Equality
• Generation Equality Forum
• Action packs

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Key takeaways on americans’ views on gender equality a century after u.s. women gained the right to vote.

Aug. 18 marks the 100-year anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, which granted women in the United States the right to vote. As this milestone approaches, about half of Americans (49%) say granting women the right to vote has been the most important milestone in advancing the position of women in the country, according to a Pew Research Center study. And while many Americans say the last decade has seen progress in the fight for gender equality, a majority say the country still hasn’t gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men. 

Here are some key takeaways from  the report , which was based on a nationally representative survey of 3,143 U.S. adults conducted online from March 18-April 1, 2020.

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand Americans’ views of the current state of gender equality and the advancement of women around the 100th anniversary of women getting the right to vote. For this analysis, we surveyed 3,143 U.S. adults in March and April 2020, including an oversample of Black and Hispanic respondents. The adults surveyed are members of the Ipsos Public Affairs KnowledgePanel, an online survey panel that is recruited through national random sampling of residential addresses and landline and cellphone numbers. KnowledgePanel provides internet access for those who do not have it and, if needed, a device to access the internet when they join the panel. To ensure that the results of this survey reflect a balanced cross section of the nation, the data are weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, age, education, race and ethnicity and other categories. The survey was conducted in English and Spanish.

Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

A majority (57%) of adults say the U.S. hasn’t gone far enough when it comes to giving women equal rights with men.  Assessments of the country’s progress vary by gender and political party. Women (64%) are more likely than men (49%) to say that the country hasn’t made enough progress, and Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party are more than twice as likely as Republicans and Republican leaners to say the U.S. hasn’t gone far enough to give women the same rights as men (76% vs. 33%). 

Americans are more dissatisfied with the state of gender equality now than when the question was asked in 2017. Three years ago, half of adults said the country hadn’t gone far enough in giving women equal rights with men, compared with 57% of adults today. This attitudinal shift has occurred across both gender and party lines.

Among those who think the country still has work to do in achieving gender equality, 77% say sexual harassment is a major obstacle to women’s equality.  Smaller shares, but still majorities, also point to other obstacles: 67% say women don’t have the same legal rights as men; 66% say that there are different societal expectations for men and women; and 64% say there aren’t enough women in positions of power. Women are more likely than men to say these are major obstacles.

When asked what gender equality would look like, many of those who say it’s somewhat or very important for men and women to have equal rights point to the workplace. Specifically, 45% volunteer that a society where women have equal rights with men would include equal pay, and 19% say there would be no discrimination in hiring, promotion or educational opportunities. About one-in-ten (9%) point to more or equal representation in business or political leadership.

About three-in-ten U.S. men think women’s gains have come at the expense of men. Most Americans (76%) say the gains have not come at the expense of men, although 22% of adults – including 28% of men and 17% of women – think they have come at the expense of men. Republican men (38%) are twice as likely as Democratic men (19%) to say the gains women have made have come at the expense of men. A quarter of Republican women also say this, compared with 12% of Democratic women.

Among women, those without a bachelor’s degree are about twice as likely as college graduates to say women’s gains have come at the expense of men (21% vs. 10%). Educational differences are less pronounced among men.

Americans are more than twice as likely to say that, when it comes to gender discrimination, the bigger problem is people not seeing it where it really does exist, rather than people seeing discrimination where it does not exist (67% vs. 31%). Three-quarters of women point to gender discrimination being overlooked as the bigger problem; 60% of men agree.

An overwhelming majority of Democrats (85%) say the bigger problem is people overlooking gender discrimination. Among Republicans, more say the bigger problem is people seeing discrimination where it doesn’t exist (53%) than say it is people not seeing it where it does exist (46%). Republican women are far more likely than Republican men to say people overlooking gender discrimination is the bigger problem (54% vs. 38%).

Majorities say the feminist movement and the Democratic Party have done at least a fair amount when it comes to institutions and groups that have helped advance women’s rights. Seven-in-ten Americans say the feminist movement has done a great deal or a fair amount to advance women’s rights in the U.S., while 59% say the same about the Democratic Party. Far fewer (37%) say the Republican Party has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights.

About three-in-ten adults (29%) say President Donald Trump has done at least a fair amount to advance women’s rights, while 69% say Trump has not done much or has done nothing at all.

While a majority of Americans say feminism has had a positive impact on the lives of white, Black and Hispanic women, more say feminism has helped White women a lot. About three-in-ten U.S. adults say feminism has helped the lives of white women (32%), About three-in-ten U.S. adults say feminism has helped the lives a white women a lot, compared with 21% and 15% who say this about Black women and Hispanic women, respectively.

Asked about the impact of feminism on other groups of women, a majority of Americans (57%) say feminism has helped lesbian and bisexual women at least a little, but fewer (41%) say feminism has helped transgender women. And while about half (49%) say feminism has helped wealthy and poor women at least a little, more say it’s helped wealthy women a lot (24%) than say it’s been equally helpful to poor women (10%).

About four-in-ten women (41%) say feminism has helped them personally. Women most likely to say this include those with a bachelor’s degree or more education (55%), Hispanic women (46%), women younger than 50 (47%) and Democratic women (50%).

Most who say the country still has work to do on gender equality say equality is likely to be achieved in the future. More than eight-in-ten Americans who say the country hasn’t made enough progress say it is very likely (31%) or somewhat likely (53%) that women will have equal rights with men in the future, compared with 16% who say they think gender equality is not too likely or not at all likely. Men who say the country has not yet achieved gender equality are more likely than women to say that gender equality is very likely (37% vs. 26%). Democratic women are the least likely to say this is very likely: 23% say this, compared with 35% of Republican women and 38% of Democratic and Republican men.

Note: Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

For Women’s History Month, a look at gender gains – and gaps – in the U.S.

Most americans support gender equality, even if they don’t identify as feminists, activism on gender equality differs widely by education among democratic women, 61% of u.s. women say ‘feminist’ describes them well; many see feminism as empowering, polarizing, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator

Contributed equally to this work with: Paola Belingheri, Filippo Chiarello, Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, Paola Rovelli

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Energia, dei Sistemi, del Territorio e delle Costruzioni, Università degli Studi di Pisa, Largo L. Lazzarino, Pisa, Italy

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy, Department of Management, Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Faculty of Economics and Management, Centre for Family Business Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

• Paola Belingheri, 
• Filippo Chiarello, 
• Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, 
• Paola Rovelli

• Published: September 21, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474
• Reader Comments

9 Nov 2021: The PLOS ONE Staff (2021) Correction: Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLOS ONE 16(11): e0259930. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259930 View correction

Gender equality is a major problem that places women at a disadvantage thereby stymieing economic growth and societal advancement. In the last two decades, extensive research has been conducted on gender related issues, studying both their antecedents and consequences. However, existing literature reviews fail to provide a comprehensive and clear picture of what has been studied so far, which could guide scholars in their future research. Our paper offers a scoping review of a large portion of the research that has been published over the last 22 years, on gender equality and related issues, with a specific focus on business and economics studies. Combining innovative methods drawn from both network analysis and text mining, we provide a synthesis of 15,465 scientific articles. We identify 27 main research topics, we measure their relevance from a semantic point of view and the relationships among them, highlighting the importance of each topic in the overall gender discourse. We find that prominent research topics mostly relate to women in the workforce–e.g., concerning compensation, role, education, decision-making and career progression. However, some of them are losing momentum, and some other research trends–for example related to female entrepreneurship, leadership and participation in the board of directors–are on the rise. Besides introducing a novel methodology to review broad literature streams, our paper offers a map of the main gender-research trends and presents the most popular and the emerging themes, as well as their intersections, outlining important avenues for future research.

Citation: Belingheri P, Chiarello F, Fronzetti Colladon A, Rovelli P (2021) Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLoS ONE 16(9): e0256474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474

Editor: Elisa Ughetto, Politecnico di Torino, ITALY

Received: June 25, 2021; Accepted: August 6, 2021; Published: September 21, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Belingheri et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files. The only exception is the text of the abstracts (over 15,000) that we have downloaded from Scopus. These abstracts can be retrieved from Scopus, but we do not have permission to redistribute them.

Funding: P.B and F.C.: Grant of the Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction of the University of Pisa (DESTEC) for the project “Measuring Gender Bias with Semantic Analysis: The Development of an Assessment Tool and its Application in the European Space Industry. P.B., F.C., A.F.C., P.R.: Grant of the Italian Association of Management Engineering (AiIG), “Misure di sostegno ai soci giovani AiIG” 2020, for the project “Gender Equality Through Data Intelligence (GEDI)”. F.C.: EU project ASSETs+ Project (Alliance for Strategic Skills addressing Emerging Technologies in Defence) EAC/A03/2018 - Erasmus+ programme, Sector Skills Alliances, Lot 3: Sector Skills Alliance for implementing a new strategic approach (Blueprint) to sectoral cooperation on skills G.A. NUMBER: 612678-EPP-1-2019-1-IT-EPPKA2-SSA-B.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The persistent gender inequalities that currently exist across the developed and developing world are receiving increasing attention from economists, policymakers, and the general public [e.g., 1 – 3 ]. Economic studies have indicated that women’s education and entry into the workforce contributes to social and economic well-being [e.g., 4 , 5 ], while their exclusion from the labor market and from managerial positions has an impact on overall labor productivity and income per capita [ 6 , 7 ]. The United Nations selected gender equality, with an emphasis on female education, as part of the Millennium Development Goals [ 8 ], and gender equality at-large as one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by 2030 [ 9 ]. These latter objectives involve not only developing nations, but rather all countries, to achieve economic, social and environmental well-being.

As is the case with many SDGs, gender equality is still far from being achieved and persists across education, access to opportunities, or presence in decision-making positions [ 7 , 10 , 11 ]. As we enter the last decade for the SDGs’ implementation, and while we are battling a global health pandemic, effective and efficient action becomes paramount to reach this ambitious goal.

Scholars have dedicated a massive effort towards understanding gender equality, its determinants, its consequences for women and society, and the appropriate actions and policies to advance women’s equality. Many topics have been covered, ranging from women’s education and human capital [ 12 , 13 ] and their role in society [e.g., 14 , 15 ], to their appointment in firms’ top ranked positions [e.g., 16 , 17 ] and performance implications [e.g., 18 , 19 ]. Despite some attempts, extant literature reviews provide a narrow view on these issues, restricted to specific topics–e.g., female students’ presence in STEM fields [ 20 ], educational gender inequality [ 5 ], the gender pay gap [ 21 ], the glass ceiling effect [ 22 ], leadership [ 23 ], entrepreneurship [ 24 ], women’s presence on the board of directors [ 25 , 26 ], diversity management [ 27 ], gender stereotypes in advertisement [ 28 ], or specific professions [ 29 ]. A comprehensive view on gender-related research, taking stock of key findings and under-studied topics is thus lacking.

Extant literature has also highlighted that gender issues, and their economic and social ramifications, are complex topics that involve a large number of possible antecedents and outcomes [ 7 ]. Indeed, gender equality actions are most effective when implemented in unison with other SDGs (e.g., with SDG 8, see [ 30 ]) in a synergetic perspective [ 10 ]. Many bodies of literature (e.g., business, economics, development studies, sociology and psychology) approach the problem of achieving gender equality from different perspectives–often addressing specific and narrow aspects. This sometimes leads to a lack of clarity about how different issues, circumstances, and solutions may be related in precipitating or mitigating gender inequality or its effects. As the number of papers grows at an increasing pace, this issue is exacerbated and there is a need to step back and survey the body of gender equality literature as a whole. There is also a need to examine synergies between different topics and approaches, as well as gaps in our understanding of how different problems and solutions work together. Considering the important topic of women’s economic and social empowerment, this paper aims to fill this gap by answering the following research question: what are the most relevant findings in the literature on gender equality and how do they relate to each other ?

To do so, we conduct a scoping review [ 31 ], providing a synthesis of 15,465 articles dealing with gender equity related issues published in the last twenty-two years, covering both the periods of the MDGs and the SDGs (i.e., 2000 to mid 2021) in all the journals indexed in the Academic Journal Guide’s 2018 ranking of business and economics journals. Given the huge amount of research conducted on the topic, we adopt an innovative methodology, which relies on social network analysis and text mining. These techniques are increasingly adopted when surveying large bodies of text. Recently, they were applied to perform analysis of online gender communication differences [ 32 ] and gender behaviors in online technology communities [ 33 ], to identify and classify sexual harassment instances in academia [ 34 ], and to evaluate the gender inclusivity of disaster management policies [ 35 ].

Applied to the title, abstracts and keywords of the articles in our sample, this methodology allows us to identify a set of 27 recurrent topics within which we automatically classify the papers. Introducing additional novelty, by means of the Semantic Brand Score (SBS) indicator [ 36 ] and the SBS BI app [ 37 ], we assess the importance of each topic in the overall gender equality discourse and its relationships with the other topics, as well as trends over time, with a more accurate description than that offered by traditional literature reviews relying solely on the number of papers presented in each topic.

This methodology, applied to gender equality research spanning the past twenty-two years, enables two key contributions. First, we extract the main message that each document is conveying and how this is connected to other themes in literature, providing a rich picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the emerging topics. Second, by examining the semantic relationship between topics and how tightly their discourses are linked, we can identify the key relationships and connections between different topics. This semi-automatic methodology is also highly reproducible with minimum effort.

This literature review is organized as follows. In the next section, we present how we selected relevant papers and how we analyzed them through text mining and social network analysis. We then illustrate the importance of 27 selected research topics, measured by means of the SBS indicator. In the results section, we present an overview of the literature based on the SBS results–followed by an in-depth narrative analysis of the top 10 topics (i.e., those with the highest SBS) and their connections. Subsequently, we highlight a series of under-studied connections between the topics where there is potential for future research. Through this analysis, we build a map of the main gender-research trends in the last twenty-two years–presenting the most popular themes. We conclude by highlighting key areas on which research should focused in the future.

Our aim is to map a broad topic, gender equality research, that has been approached through a host of different angles and through different disciplines. Scoping reviews are the most appropriate as they provide the freedom to map different themes and identify literature gaps, thereby guiding the recommendation of new research agendas [ 38 ].

Several practical approaches have been proposed to identify and assess the underlying topics of a specific field using big data [ 39 – 41 ], but many of them fail without proper paper retrieval and text preprocessing. This is specifically true for a research field such as the gender-related one, which comprises the work of scholars from different backgrounds. In this section, we illustrate a novel approach for the analysis of scientific (gender-related) papers that relies on methods and tools of social network analysis and text mining. Our procedure has four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) text preprocessing, (3) keywords extraction and classification, and (4) evaluation of semantic importance and image.

Data collection

In this study, we analyze 22 years of literature on gender-related research. Following established practice for scoping reviews [ 42 ], our data collection consisted of two main steps, which we summarize here below.

Firstly, we retrieved from the Scopus database all the articles written in English that contained the term “gender” in their title, abstract or keywords and were published in a journal listed in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) ( https://charteredabs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/AJG2018-Methodology.pdf ), considering the time period from Jan 2000 to May 2021. We used this information considering that abstracts, titles and keywords represent the most informative part of a paper, while using the full-text would increase the signal-to-noise ratio for information extraction. Indeed, these textual elements already demonstrated to be reliable sources of information for the task of domain lexicon extraction [ 43 , 44 ]. We chose Scopus as source of literature because of its popularity, its update rate, and because it offers an API to ease the querying process. Indeed, while it does not allow to retrieve the full text of scientific articles, the Scopus API offers access to titles, abstracts, citation information and metadata for all its indexed scholarly journals. Moreover, we decided to focus on the journals listed in the AJG 2018 ranking because we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies only. The AJG is indeed widely used by universities and business schools as a reference point for journal and research rigor and quality. This first step, executed in June 2021, returned more than 55,000 papers.

In the second step–because a look at the papers showed very sparse results, many of which were not in line with the topic of this literature review (e.g., papers dealing with health care or medical issues, where the word gender indicates the gender of the patients)–we applied further inclusion criteria to make the sample more focused on the topic of this literature review (i.e., women’s gender equality issues). Specifically, we only retained those papers mentioning, in their title and/or abstract, both gender-related keywords (e.g., daughter, female, mother) and keywords referring to bias and equality issues (e.g., equality, bias, diversity, inclusion). After text pre-processing (see next section), keywords were first identified from a frequency-weighted list of words found in the titles, abstracts and keywords in the initial list of papers, extracted through text mining (following the same approach as [ 43 ]). They were selected by two of the co-authors independently, following respectively a bottom up and a top-down approach. The bottom-up approach consisted of examining the words found in the frequency-weighted list and classifying those related to gender and equality. The top-down approach consisted in searching in the word list for notable gender and equality-related words. Table 1 reports the sets of keywords we considered, together with some examples of words that were used to search for their presence in the dataset (a full list is provided in the S1 Text ). At end of this second step, we obtained a final sample of 15,465 relevant papers.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t001

Text processing and keyword extraction

Text preprocessing aims at structuring text into a form that can be analyzed by statistical models. In the present section, we describe the preprocessing steps we applied to paper titles and abstracts, which, as explained below, partially follow a standard text preprocessing pipeline [ 45 ]. These activities have been performed using the R package udpipe [ 46 ].

The first step is n-gram extraction (i.e., a sequence of words from a given text sample) to identify which n-grams are important in the analysis, since domain-specific lexicons are often composed by bi-grams and tri-grams [ 47 ]. Multi-word extraction is usually implemented with statistics and linguistic rules, thus using the statistical properties of n-grams or machine learning approaches [ 48 ]. However, for the present paper, we used Scopus metadata in order to have a more effective and efficient n-grams collection approach [ 49 ]. We used the keywords of each paper in order to tag n-grams with their associated keywords automatically. Using this greedy approach, it was possible to collect all the keywords listed by the authors of the papers. From this list, we extracted only keywords composed by two, three and four words, we removed all the acronyms and rare keywords (i.e., appearing in less than 1% of papers), and we clustered keywords showing a high orthographic similarity–measured using a Levenshtein distance [ 50 ] lower than 2, considering these groups of keywords as representing same concepts, but expressed with different spelling. After tagging the n-grams in the abstracts, we followed a common data preparation pipeline that consists of the following steps: (i) tokenization, that splits the text into tokens (i.e., single words and previously tagged multi-words); (ii) removal of stop-words (i.e. those words that add little meaning to the text, usually being very common and short functional words–such as “and”, “or”, or “of”); (iii) parts-of-speech tagging, that is providing information concerning the morphological role of a word and its morphosyntactic context (e.g., if the token is a determiner, the next token is a noun or an adjective with very high confidence, [ 51 ]); and (iv) lemmatization, which consists in substituting each word with its dictionary form (or lemma). The output of the latter step allows grouping together the inflected forms of a word. For example, the verbs “am”, “are”, and “is” have the shared lemma “be”, or the nouns “cat” and “cats” both share the lemma “cat”. We preferred lemmatization over stemming [ 52 ] in order to obtain more interpretable results.

In addition, we identified a further set of keywords (with respect to those listed in the “keywords” field) by applying a series of automatic words unification and removal steps, as suggested in past research [ 53 , 54 ]. We removed: sparse terms (i.e., occurring in less than 0.1% of all documents), common terms (i.e., occurring in more than 10% of all documents) and retained only nouns and adjectives. It is relevant to notice that no document was lost due to these steps. We then used the TF-IDF function [ 55 ] to produce a new list of keywords. We additionally tested other approaches for the identification and clustering of keywords–such as TextRank [ 56 ] or Latent Dirichlet Allocation [ 57 ]–without obtaining more informative results.

Classification of research topics

To guide the literature analysis, two experts met regularly to examine the sample of collected papers and to identify the main topics and trends in gender research. Initially, they conducted brainstorming sessions on the topics they expected to find, due to their knowledge of the literature. This led to an initial list of topics. Subsequently, the experts worked independently, also supported by the keywords in paper titles and abstracts extracted with the procedure described above.

Considering all this information, each expert identified and clustered relevant keywords into topics. At the end of the process, the two assignments were compared and exhibited a 92% agreement. Another meeting was held to discuss discordant cases and reach a consensus. This resulted in a list of 27 topics, briefly introduced in Table 2 and subsequently detailed in the following sections.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t002

Evaluation of semantic importance

Working on the lemmatized corpus of the 15,465 papers included in our sample, we proceeded with the evaluation of semantic importance trends for each topic and with the analysis of their connections and prevalent textual associations. To this aim, we used the Semantic Brand Score indicator [ 36 ], calculated through the SBS BI webapp [ 37 ] that also produced a brand image report for each topic. For this study we relied on the computing resources of the ENEA/CRESCO infrastructure [ 58 ].

The Semantic Brand Score (SBS) is a measure of semantic importance that combines methods of social network analysis and text mining. It is usually applied for the analysis of (big) textual data to evaluate the importance of one or more brands, names, words, or sets of keywords [ 36 ]. Indeed, the concept of “brand” is intended in a flexible way and goes beyond products or commercial brands. In this study, we evaluate the SBS time-trends of the keywords defining the research topics discussed in the previous section. Semantic importance comprises the three dimensions of topic prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Prevalence measures how frequently a research topic is used in the discourse. The more a topic is mentioned by scientific articles, the more the research community will be aware of it, with possible increase of future studies; this construct is partly related to that of brand awareness [ 59 ]. This effect is even stronger, considering that we are analyzing the title, abstract and keywords of the papers, i.e. the parts that have the highest visibility. A very important characteristic of the SBS is that it considers the relationships among words in a text. Topic importance is not just a matter of how frequently a topic is mentioned, but also of the associations a topic has in the text. Specifically, texts are transformed into networks of co-occurring words, and relationships are studied through social network analysis [ 60 ]. This step is necessary to calculate the other two dimensions of our semantic importance indicator. Accordingly, a social network of words is generated for each time period considered in the analysis–i.e., a graph made of n nodes (words) and E edges weighted by co-occurrence frequency, with W being the set of edge weights. The keywords representing each topic were clustered into single nodes.

The construct of diversity relates to that of brand image [ 59 ], in the sense that it considers the richness and distinctiveness of textual (topic) associations. Considering the above-mentioned networks, we calculated diversity using the distinctiveness centrality metric–as in the formula presented by Fronzetti Colladon and Naldi [ 61 ].

Lastly, connectivity was measured as the weighted betweenness centrality [ 62 , 63 ] of each research topic node. We used the formula presented by Wasserman and Faust [ 60 ]. The dimension of connectivity represents the “brokerage power” of each research topic–i.e., how much it can serve as a bridge to connect other terms (and ultimately topics) in the discourse [ 36 ].

The SBS is the final composite indicator obtained by summing the standardized scores of prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Standardization was carried out considering all the words in the corpus, for each specific timeframe.

This methodology, applied to a large and heterogeneous body of text, enables to automatically identify two important sets of information that add value to the literature review. Firstly, the relevance of each topic in literature is measured through a composite indicator of semantic importance, rather than simply looking at word frequencies. This provides a much richer picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the topics that are emerging in the literature. Secondly, it enables to examine the extent of the semantic relationship between topics, looking at how tightly their discourses are linked. In a field such as gender equality, where many topics are closely linked to each other and present overlaps in issues and solutions, this methodology offers a novel perspective with respect to traditional literature reviews. In addition, it ensures reproducibility over time and the possibility to semi-automatically update the analysis, as new papers become available.

Overview of main topics

In terms of descriptive textual statistics, our corpus is made of 15,465 text documents, consisting of a total of 2,685,893 lemmatized tokens (words) and 32,279 types. As a result, the type-token ratio is 1.2%. The number of hapaxes is 12,141, with a hapax-token ratio of 37.61%.

Fig 1 shows the list of 27 topics by decreasing SBS. The most researched topic is compensation , exceeding all others in prevalence, diversity, and connectivity. This means it is not only mentioned more often than other topics, but it is also connected to a greater number of other topics and is central to the discourse on gender equality. The next four topics are, in order of SBS, role , education , decision-making , and career progression . These topics, except for education , all concern women in the workforce. Between these first five topics and the following ones there is a clear drop in SBS scores. In particular, the topics that follow have a lower connectivity than the first five. They are hiring , performance , behavior , organization , and human capital . Again, except for behavior and human capital , the other three topics are purely related to women in the workforce. After another drop-off, the following topics deal prevalently with women in society. This trend highlights that research on gender in business journals has so far mainly paid attention to the conditions that women experience in business contexts, while also devoting some attention to women in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g001

Fig 2 shows the SBS time series of the top 10 topics. While there has been a general increase in the number of Scopus-indexed publications in the last decade, we notice that some SBS trends remain steady, or even decrease. In particular, we observe that the main topic of the last twenty-two years, compensation , is losing momentum. Since 2016, it has been surpassed by decision-making , education and role , which may indicate that literature is increasingly attempting to identify root causes of compensation inequalities. Moreover, in the last two years, the topics of hiring , performance , and organization are experiencing the largest importance increase.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g002

Fig 3 shows the SBS time trends of the remaining 17 topics (i.e., those not in the top 10). As we can see from the graph, there are some that maintain a steady trend–such as reputation , management , networks and governance , which also seem to have little importance. More relevant topics with average stationary trends (except for the last two years) are culture , family , and parenting . The feminine topic is among the most important here, and one of those that exhibit the larger variations over time (similarly to leadership ). On the other hand, the are some topics that, even if not among the most important, show increasing SBS trends; therefore, they could be considered as emerging topics and could become popular in the near future. These are entrepreneurship , leadership , board of directors , and sustainability . These emerging topics are also interesting to anticipate future trends in gender equality research that are conducive to overall equality in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g003

In addition to the SBS score of the different topics, the network of terms they are associated to enables to gauge the extent to which their images (textual associations) overlap or differ ( Fig 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g004

There is a central cluster of topics with high similarity, which are all connected with women in the workforce. The cluster includes topics such as organization , decision-making , performance , hiring , human capital , education and compensation . In addition, the topic of well-being is found within this cluster, suggesting that women’s equality in the workforce is associated to well-being considerations. The emerging topics of entrepreneurship and leadership are also closely connected with each other, possibly implying that leadership is a much-researched quality in female entrepreneurship. Topics that are relatively more distant include personality , politics , feminine , empowerment , management , board of directors , reputation , governance , parenting , masculine and network .

The following sections describe the top 10 topics and their main associations in literature (see Table 3 ), while providing a brief overview of the emerging topics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t003

Compensation.

The topic of compensation is related to the topics of role , hiring , education and career progression , however, also sees a very high association with the words gap and inequality . Indeed, a well-known debate in degrowth economics centers around whether and how to adequately compensate women for their childbearing, childrearing, caregiver and household work [e.g., 30 ].

Even in paid work, women continue being offered lower compensations than their male counterparts who have the same job or cover the same role [ 64 – 67 ]. This severe inequality has been widely studied by scholars over the last twenty-two years. Dealing with this topic, some specific roles have been addressed. Specifically, research highlighted differences in compensation between female and male CEOs [e.g., 68 ], top executives [e.g., 69 ], and boards’ directors [e.g., 70 ]. Scholars investigated the determinants of these gaps, such as the gender composition of the board [e.g., 71 – 73 ] or women’s individual characteristics [e.g., 71 , 74 ].

Among these individual characteristics, education plays a relevant role [ 75 ]. Education is indeed presented as the solution for women, not only to achieve top executive roles, but also to reduce wage inequality [e.g., 76 , 77 ]. Past research has highlighted education influences on gender wage gaps, specifically referring to gender differences in skills [e.g., 78 ], college majors [e.g., 79 ], and college selectivity [e.g., 80 ].

Finally, the wage gap issue is strictly interrelated with hiring –e.g., looking at whether being a mother affects hiring and compensation [e.g., 65 , 81 ] or relating compensation to unemployment [e.g., 82 ]–and career progression –for instance looking at meritocracy [ 83 , 84 ] or the characteristics of the boss for whom women work [e.g., 85 ].

The roles covered by women have been deeply investigated. Scholars have focused on the role of women in their families and the society as a whole [e.g., 14 , 15 ], and, more widely, in business contexts [e.g., 18 , 81 ]. Indeed, despite still lagging behind their male counterparts [e.g., 86 , 87 ], in the last decade there has been an increase in top ranked positions achieved by women [e.g., 88 , 89 ]. Following this phenomenon, scholars have posed greater attention towards the presence of women in the board of directors [e.g., 16 , 18 , 90 , 91 ], given the increasing pressure to appoint female directors that firms, especially listed ones, have experienced. Other scholars have focused on the presence of women covering the role of CEO [e.g., 17 , 92 ] or being part of the top management team [e.g., 93 ]. Irrespectively of the level of analysis, all these studies tried to uncover the antecedents of women’s presence among top managers [e.g., 92 , 94 ] and the consequences of having a them involved in the firm’s decision-making –e.g., on performance [e.g., 19 , 95 , 96 ], risk [e.g., 97 , 98 ], and corporate social responsibility [e.g., 99 , 100 ].

Besides studying the difficulties and discriminations faced by women in getting a job [ 81 , 101 ], and, more specifically in the hiring , appointment, or career progression to these apical roles [e.g., 70 , 83 ], the majority of research of women’s roles dealt with compensation issues. Specifically, scholars highlight the pay-gap that still exists between women and men, both in general [e.g., 64 , 65 ], as well as referring to boards’ directors [e.g., 70 , 102 ], CEOs and executives [e.g., 69 , 103 , 104 ].

Finally, other scholars focused on the behavior of women when dealing with business. In this sense, particular attention has been paid to leadership and entrepreneurial behaviors. The former quite overlaps with dealing with the roles mentioned above, but also includes aspects such as leaders being stereotyped as masculine [e.g., 105 ], the need for greater exposure to female leaders to reduce biases [e.g., 106 ], or female leaders acting as queen bees [e.g., 107 ]. Regarding entrepreneurship , scholars mainly investigated women’s entrepreneurial entry [e.g., 108 , 109 ], differences between female and male entrepreneurs in the evaluations and funding received from investors [e.g., 110 , 111 ], and their performance gap [e.g., 112 , 113 ].

Education has long been recognized as key to social advancement and economic stability [ 114 ], for job progression and also a barrier to gender equality, especially in STEM-related fields. Research on education and gender equality is mostly linked with the topics of compensation , human capital , career progression , hiring , parenting and decision-making .

Education contributes to a higher human capital [ 115 ] and constitutes an investment on the part of women towards their future. In this context, literature points to the gender gap in educational attainment, and the consequences for women from a social, economic, personal and professional standpoint. Women are found to have less access to formal education and information, especially in emerging countries, which in turn may cause them to lose social and economic opportunities [e.g., 12 , 116 – 119 ]. Education in local and rural communities is also paramount to communicate the benefits of female empowerment , contributing to overall societal well-being [e.g., 120 ].

Once women access education, the image they have of the world and their place in society (i.e., habitus) affects their education performance [ 13 ] and is passed on to their children. These situations reinforce gender stereotypes, which become self-fulfilling prophecies that may negatively affect female students’ performance by lowering their confidence and heightening their anxiety [ 121 , 122 ]. Besides formal education, also the information that women are exposed to on a daily basis contributes to their human capital . Digital inequalities, for instance, stems from men spending more time online and acquiring higher digital skills than women [ 123 ].

Education is also a factor that should boost employability of candidates and thus hiring , career progression and compensation , however the relationship between these factors is not straightforward [ 115 ]. First, educational choices ( decision-making ) are influenced by variables such as self-efficacy and the presence of barriers, irrespectively of the career opportunities they offer, especially in STEM [ 124 ]. This brings additional difficulties to women’s enrollment and persistence in scientific and technical fields of study due to stereotypes and biases [ 125 , 126 ]. Moreover, access to education does not automatically translate into job opportunities for women and minority groups [ 127 , 128 ] or into female access to managerial positions [ 129 ].

Finally, parenting is reported as an antecedent of education [e.g., 130 ], with much of the literature focusing on the role of parents’ education on the opportunities afforded to children to enroll in education [ 131 – 134 ] and the role of parenting in their offspring’s perception of study fields and attitudes towards learning [ 135 – 138 ]. Parental education is also a predictor of the other related topics, namely human capital and compensation [ 139 ].

Decision-making.

This literature mainly points to the fact that women are thought to make decisions differently than men. Women have indeed different priorities, such as they care more about people’s well-being, working with people or helping others, rather than maximizing their personal (or their firm’s) gain [ 140 ]. In other words, women typically present more communal than agentic behaviors, which are instead more frequent among men [ 141 ]. These different attitude, behavior and preferences in turn affect the decisions they make [e.g., 142 ] and the decision-making of the firm in which they work [e.g., 143 ].

At the individual level, gender affects, for instance, career aspirations [e.g., 144 ] and choices [e.g., 142 , 145 ], or the decision of creating a venture [e.g., 108 , 109 , 146 ]. Moreover, in everyday life, women and men make different decisions regarding partners [e.g., 147 ], childcare [e.g., 148 ], education [e.g., 149 ], attention to the environment [e.g., 150 ] and politics [e.g., 151 ].

At the firm level, scholars highlighted, for example, how the presence of women in the board affects corporate decisions [e.g., 152 , 153 ], that female CEOs are more conservative in accounting decisions [e.g., 154 ], or that female CFOs tend to make more conservative decisions regarding the firm’s financial reporting [e.g., 155 ]. Nevertheless, firm level research also investigated decisions that, influenced by gender bias, affect women, such as those pertaining hiring [e.g., 156 , 157 ], compensation [e.g., 73 , 158 ], or the empowerment of women once appointed [ 159 ].

Career progression.

Once women have entered the workforce, the key aspect to achieve gender equality becomes career progression , including efforts toward overcoming the glass ceiling. Indeed, according to the SBS analysis, career progression is highly related to words such as work, social issues and equality. The topic with which it has the highest semantic overlap is role , followed by decision-making , hiring , education , compensation , leadership , human capital , and family .

Career progression implies an advancement in the hierarchical ladder of the firm, assigning managerial roles to women. Coherently, much of the literature has focused on identifying rationales for a greater female participation in the top management team and board of directors [e.g., 95 ] as well as the best criteria to ensure that the decision-makers promote the most valuable employees irrespectively of their individual characteristics, such as gender [e.g., 84 ]. The link between career progression , role and compensation is often provided in practice by performance appraisal exercises, frequently rooted in a culture of meritocracy that guides bonuses, salary increases and promotions. However, performance appraisals can actually mask gender-biased decisions where women are held to higher standards than their male colleagues [e.g., 83 , 84 , 95 , 160 , 161 ]. Women often have less opportunities to gain leadership experience and are less visible than their male colleagues, which constitute barriers to career advancement [e.g., 162 ]. Therefore, transparency and accountability, together with procedures that discourage discretionary choices, are paramount to achieve a fair career progression [e.g., 84 ], together with the relaxation of strict job boundaries in favor of cross-functional and self-directed tasks [e.g., 163 ].

In addition, a series of stereotypes about the type of leadership characteristics that are required for top management positions, which fit better with typical male and agentic attributes, are another key barrier to career advancement for women [e.g., 92 , 160 ].

Hiring is the entrance gateway for women into the workforce. Therefore, it is related to other workforce topics such as compensation , role , career progression , decision-making , human capital , performance , organization and education .

A first stream of literature focuses on the process leading up to candidates’ job applications, demonstrating that bias exists before positions are even opened, and it is perpetuated both by men and women through networking and gatekeeping practices [e.g., 164 , 165 ].

The hiring process itself is also subject to biases [ 166 ], for example gender-congruity bias that leads to men being preferred candidates in male-dominated sectors [e.g., 167 ], women being hired in positions with higher risk of failure [e.g., 168 ] and limited transparency and accountability afforded by written processes and procedures [e.g., 164 ] that all contribute to ascriptive inequality. In addition, providing incentives for evaluators to hire women may actually work to this end; however, this is not the case when supporting female candidates endangers higher-ranking male ones [ 169 ].

Another interesting perspective, instead, looks at top management teams’ composition and the effects on hiring practices, indicating that firms with more women in top management are less likely to lay off staff [e.g., 152 ].

Performance.

Several scholars posed their attention towards women’s performance, its consequences [e.g., 170 , 171 ] and the implications of having women in decision-making positions [e.g., 18 , 19 ].

At the individual level, research focused on differences in educational and academic performance between women and men, especially referring to the gender gap in STEM fields [e.g., 171 ]. The presence of stereotype threats–that is the expectation that the members of a social group (e.g., women) “must deal with the possibility of being judged or treated stereotypically, or of doing something that would confirm the stereotype” [ 172 ]–affects women’s interested in STEM [e.g., 173 ], as well as their cognitive ability tests, penalizing them [e.g., 174 ]. A stronger gender identification enhances this gap [e.g., 175 ], whereas mentoring and role models can be used as solutions to this problem [e.g., 121 ]. Despite the negative effect of stereotype threats on girls’ performance [ 176 ], female and male students perform equally in mathematics and related subjects [e.g., 177 ]. Moreover, while individuals’ performance at school and university generally affects their achievements and the field in which they end up working, evidence reveals that performance in math or other scientific subjects does not explain why fewer women enter STEM working fields; rather this gap depends on other aspects, such as culture, past working experiences, or self-efficacy [e.g., 170 ]. Finally, scholars have highlighted the penalization that women face for their positive performance, for instance when they succeed in traditionally male areas [e.g., 178 ]. This penalization is explained by the violation of gender-stereotypic prescriptions [e.g., 179 , 180 ], that is having women well performing in agentic areas, which are typical associated to men. Performance penalization can thus be overcome by clearly conveying communal characteristics and behaviors [ 178 ].

Evidence has been provided on how the involvement of women in boards of directors and decision-making positions affects firms’ performance. Nevertheless, results are mixed, with some studies showing positive effects on financial [ 19 , 181 , 182 ] and corporate social performance [ 99 , 182 , 183 ]. Other studies maintain a negative association [e.g., 18 ], and other again mixed [e.g., 184 ] or non-significant association [e.g., 185 ]. Also with respect to the presence of a female CEO, mixed results emerged so far, with some researches demonstrating a positive effect on firm’s performance [e.g., 96 , 186 ], while other obtaining only a limited evidence of this relationship [e.g., 103 ] or a negative one [e.g., 187 ].

Finally, some studies have investigated whether and how women’s performance affects their hiring [e.g., 101 ] and career progression [e.g., 83 , 160 ]. For instance, academic performance leads to different returns in hiring for women and men. Specifically, high-achieving men are called back significantly more often than high-achieving women, which are penalized when they have a major in mathematics; this result depends on employers’ gendered standards for applicants [e.g., 101 ]. Once appointed, performance ratings are more strongly related to promotions for women than men, and promoted women typically show higher past performance ratings than those of promoted men. This suggesting that women are subject to stricter standards for promotion [e.g., 160 ].

Behavioral aspects related to gender follow two main streams of literature. The first examines female personality and behavior in the workplace, and their alignment with cultural expectations or stereotypes [e.g., 188 ] as well as their impacts on equality. There is a common bias that depicts women as less agentic than males. Certain characteristics, such as those more congruent with male behaviors–e.g., self-promotion [e.g., 189 ], negotiation skills [e.g., 190 ] and general agentic behavior [e.g., 191 ]–, are less accepted in women. However, characteristics such as individualism in women have been found to promote greater gender equality in society [ 192 ]. In addition, behaviors such as display of emotions [e.g., 193 ], which are stereotypically female, work against women’s acceptance in the workplace, requiring women to carefully moderate their behavior to avoid exclusion. A counter-intuitive result is that women and minorities, which are more marginalized in the workplace, tend to be better problem-solvers in innovation competitions due to their different knowledge bases [ 194 ].

The other side of the coin is examined in a parallel literature stream on behavior towards women in the workplace. As a result of biases, prejudices and stereotypes, women may experience adverse behavior from their colleagues, such as incivility and harassment, which undermine their well-being [e.g., 195 , 196 ]. Biases that go beyond gender, such as for overweight people, are also more strongly applied to women [ 197 ].

Organization.

The role of women and gender bias in organizations has been studied from different perspectives, which mirror those presented in detail in the following sections. Specifically, most research highlighted the stereotypical view of leaders [e.g., 105 ] and the roles played by women within firms, for instance referring to presence in the board of directors [e.g., 18 , 90 , 91 ], appointment as CEOs [e.g., 16 ], or top executives [e.g., 93 ].

Scholars have investigated antecedents and consequences of the presence of women in these apical roles. On the one side they looked at hiring and career progression [e.g., 83 , 92 , 160 , 168 , 198 ], finding women typically disadvantaged with respect to their male counterparts. On the other side, they studied women’s leadership styles and influence on the firm’s decision-making [e.g., 152 , 154 , 155 , 199 ], with implications for performance [e.g., 18 , 19 , 96 ].

Human capital.

Human capital is a transverse topic that touches upon many different aspects of female gender equality. As such, it has the most associations with other topics, starting with education as mentioned above, with career-related topics such as role , decision-making , hiring , career progression , performance , compensation , leadership and organization . Another topic with which there is a close connection is behavior . In general, human capital is approached both from the education standpoint but also from the perspective of social capital.

The behavioral aspect in human capital comprises research related to gender differences for example in cultural and religious beliefs that influence women’s attitudes and perceptions towards STEM subjects [ 142 , 200 – 202 ], towards employment [ 203 ] or towards environmental issues [ 150 , 204 ]. These cultural differences also emerge in the context of globalization which may accelerate gender equality in the workforce [ 205 , 206 ]. Gender differences also appear in behaviors such as motivation [ 207 ], and in negotiation [ 190 ], and have repercussions on women’s decision-making related to their careers. The so-called gender equality paradox sees women in countries with lower gender equality more likely to pursue studies and careers in STEM fields, whereas the gap in STEM enrollment widens as countries achieve greater equality in society [ 171 ].

Career progression is modeled by literature as a choice-process where personal preferences, culture and decision-making affect the chosen path and the outcomes. Some literature highlights how women tend to self-select into different professions than men, often due to stereotypes rather than actual ability to perform in these professions [ 142 , 144 ]. These stereotypes also affect the perceptions of female performance or the amount of human capital required to equal male performance [ 110 , 193 , 208 ], particularly for mothers [ 81 ]. It is therefore often assumed that women are better suited to less visible and less leadership -oriented roles [ 209 ]. Women also express differing preferences towards work-family balance, which affect whether and how they pursue human capital gains [ 210 ], and ultimately their career progression and salary .

On the other hand, men are often unaware of gendered processes and behaviors that they carry forward in their interactions and decision-making [ 211 , 212 ]. Therefore, initiatives aimed at increasing managers’ human capital –by raising awareness of gender disparities in their organizations and engaging them in diversity promotion–are essential steps to counter gender bias and segregation [ 213 ].

Emerging topics: Leadership and entrepreneurship

Among the emerging topics, the most pervasive one is women reaching leadership positions in the workforce and in society. This is still a rare occurrence for two main types of factors, on the one hand, bias and discrimination make it harder for women to access leadership positions [e.g., 214 – 216 ], on the other hand, the competitive nature and high pressure associated with leadership positions, coupled with the lack of women currently represented, reduce women’s desire to achieve them [e.g., 209 , 217 ]. Women are more effective leaders when they have access to education, resources and a diverse environment with representation [e.g., 218 , 219 ].

One sector where there is potential for women to carve out a leadership role is entrepreneurship . Although at the start of the millennium the discourse on entrepreneurship was found to be “discriminatory, gender-biased, ethnocentrically determined and ideologically controlled” [ 220 ], an increasing body of literature is studying how to stimulate female entrepreneurship as an alternative pathway to wealth, leadership and empowerment [e.g., 221 ]. Many barriers exist for women to access entrepreneurship, including the institutional and legal environment, social and cultural factors, access to knowledge and resources, and individual behavior [e.g., 222 , 223 ]. Education has been found to raise women’s entrepreneurial intentions [e.g., 224 ], although this effect is smaller than for men [e.g., 109 ]. In addition, increasing self-efficacy and risk-taking behavior constitute important success factors [e.g., 225 ].

Finally, the topic of sustainability is worth mentioning, as it is the primary objective of the SDGs and is closely associated with societal well-being. As society grapples with the effects of climate change and increasing depletion of natural resources, a narrative has emerged on women and their greater link to the environment [ 226 ]. Studies in developed countries have found some support for women leaders’ attention to sustainability issues in firms [e.g., 227 – 229 ], and smaller resource consumption by women [ 230 ]. At the same time, women will likely be more affected by the consequences of climate change [e.g., 230 ] but often lack the decision-making power to influence local decision-making on resource management and environmental policies [e.g., 231 ].

Research gaps and conclusions

Research on gender equality has advanced rapidly in the past decades, with a steady increase in publications, both in mainstream topics related to women in education and the workforce, and in emerging topics. Through a novel approach combining methods of text mining and social network analysis, we examined a comprehensive body of literature comprising 15,465 papers published between 2000 and mid 2021 on topics related to gender equality. We identified a set of 27 topics addressed by the literature and examined their connections.

At the highest level of abstraction, it is worth noting that papers abound on the identification of issues related to gender inequalities and imbalances in the workforce and in society. Literature has thoroughly examined the (unconscious) biases, barriers, stereotypes, and discriminatory behaviors that women are facing as a result of their gender. Instead, there are much fewer papers that discuss or demonstrate effective solutions to overcome gender bias [e.g., 121 , 143 , 145 , 163 , 194 , 213 , 232 ]. This is partly due to the relative ease in studying the status quo, as opposed to studying changes in the status quo. However, we observed a shift in the more recent years towards solution seeking in this domain, which we strongly encourage future researchers to focus on. In the future, we may focus on collecting and mapping pro-active contributions to gender studies, using additional Natural Language Processing techniques, able to measure the sentiment of scientific papers [ 43 ].

All of the mainstream topics identified in our literature review are closely related, and there is a wealth of insights looking at the intersection between issues such as education and career progression or human capital and role . However, emerging topics are worthy of being furtherly explored. It would be interesting to see more work on the topic of female entrepreneurship , exploring aspects such as education , personality , governance , management and leadership . For instance, how can education support female entrepreneurship? How can self-efficacy and risk-taking behaviors be taught or enhanced? What are the differences in managerial and governance styles of female entrepreneurs? Which personality traits are associated with successful entrepreneurs? Which traits are preferred by venture capitalists and funding bodies?

The emerging topic of sustainability also deserves further attention, as our society struggles with climate change and its consequences. It would be interesting to see more research on the intersection between sustainability and entrepreneurship , looking at how female entrepreneurs are tackling sustainability issues, examining both their business models and their company governance . In addition, scholars are suggested to dig deeper into the relationship between family values and behaviors.

Moreover, it would be relevant to understand how women’s networks (social capital), or the composition and structure of social networks involving both women and men, enable them to increase their remuneration and reach top corporate positions, participate in key decision-making bodies, and have a voice in communities. Furthermore, the achievement of gender equality might significantly change firm networks and ecosystems, with important implications for their performance and survival.

Similarly, research at the nexus of (corporate) governance , career progression , compensation and female empowerment could yield useful insights–for example discussing how enterprises, institutions and countries are managed and the impact for women and other minorities. Are there specific governance structures that favor diversity and inclusion?

Lastly, we foresee an emerging stream of research pertaining how the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged women, especially in the workforce, by making gender biases more evident.

For our analysis, we considered a set of 15,465 articles downloaded from the Scopus database (which is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature). As we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies, we only considered those papers published in journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide (AJG) 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). All the journals listed in this ranking are also indexed by Scopus. Therefore, looking at a single database (i.e., Scopus) should not be considered a limitation of our study. However, future research could consider different databases and inclusion criteria.

With our literature review, we offer researchers a comprehensive map of major gender-related research trends over the past twenty-two years. This can serve as a lens to look to the future, contributing to the achievement of SDG5. Researchers may use our study as a starting point to identify key themes addressed in the literature. In addition, our methodological approach–based on the use of the Semantic Brand Score and its webapp–could support scholars interested in reviewing other areas of research.

Supporting information

S1 text. keywords used for paper selection..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.s001

Acknowledgments

The computing resources and the related technical support used for this work have been provided by CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure and its staff. CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure is funded by ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development and by Italian and European research programmes (see http://www.cresco.enea.it/english for information).

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 9. UN. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembley 70 Session; 2015.
• 11. Nature. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature. 2020;577(January 2):7–8
• 37. Fronzetti Colladon A, Grippa F. Brand intelligence analytics. In: Przegalinska A, Grippa F, Gloor PA, editors. Digital Transformation of Collaboration. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2020. p. 125–41. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233276 pmid:32442196
• 39. Griffiths TL, Steyvers M, editors. Finding scientific topics. National academy of Sciences; 2004.
• 40. Mimno D, Wallach H, Talley E, Leenders M, McCallum A, editors. Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models. 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2011.
• 41. Wang C, Blei DM, editors. Collaborative topic modeling for recommending scientific articles. 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining 2011.
• 46. Straka M, Straková J, editors. Tokenizing, pos tagging, lemmatizing and parsing ud 2.0 with udpipe. CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies; 2017.
• 49. Lu Y, Li, R., Wen K, Lu Z, editors. Automatic keyword extraction for scientific literatures using references. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Innovative Design and Manufacturing (ICIDM); 2014.
• 55. Roelleke T, Wang J, editors. TF-IDF uncovered. 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval—SIGIR ‘08; 2008.
• 56. Mihalcea R, Tarau P, editors. TextRank: Bringing order into text. 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2004.
• 58. Iannone F, Ambrosino F, Bracco G, De Rosa M, Funel A, Guarnieri G, et al., editors. CRESCO ENEA HPC clusters: A working example of a multifabric GPFS Spectrum Scale layout. 2019 International Conference on High Performance Computing & Simulation (HPCS); 2019.
• 60. Wasserman S, Faust K. Social network analysis: Methods and applications: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
• 141. Williams JE, Best DL. Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study, Rev: Sage Publications, Inc; 1990.
• 172. Steele CM, Aronson J. Stereotype threat and the test performance of academically successful African Americans. In: Jencks C, Phillips M, editors. The Black–White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings; 1998. p. 401–27

• Contributors
•  Links
•  Translations
• What is Gendered Innovations ?

Sex & Gender Analysis

• Research Priorities
• Rethinking Concepts
• Research Questions
• Analyzing Sex
• Analyzing Gender
• Sex and Gender Interact
• Intersectional Approaches
• Engineering Innovation
• Participatory Research
• Reference Models
• Language & Visualizations
• Tissues & Cells
• Lab Animal Research
• Sex in Biomedicine
• Gender in Health & Biomedicine
• Evolutionary Biology
• Machine Learning
• Social Robotics
• Hermaphroditic Species
• Impact Assessment
• Norm-Critical Innovation
• Intersectionality
• Race and Ethnicity
• Age and Sex in Drug Development
• Engineering
• Health & Medicine
• SABV in Biomedicine
• Tissues & Cells
• Urban Planning & Design

Case Studies

• Animal Research
• Animal Research 2
• Computer Science Curriculum
• Genetics of Sex Determination
• Chronic Pain
• Colorectal Cancer
• De-Gendering the Knee
• Dietary Assessment Method
• Heart Disease in Diverse Populations
• Medical Technology
• Nanomedicine
• Nanotechnology-Based Screening for HPV
• Nutrigenomics
• Osteoporosis Research in Men
• Prescription Drugs
• Systems Biology
• Assistive Technologies for the Elderly
• Domestic Robots
• Extended Virtual Reality
• Facial Recognition
• Gendering Social Robots
• Haptic Technology
• HIV Microbicides
• Inclusive Crash Test Dummies
• Human Thorax Model
• Machine Translation
• Making Machines Talk
• Video Games
• Virtual Assistants and Chatbots
• Agriculture
• Climate Change
• Environmental Chemicals
• Housing and Neighborhood Design
• Marine Science
• Menstrual Cups
• Population and Climate Change
• Quality Urban Spaces
• Smart Energy Solutions
• Smart Mobility
• Sustainable Fashion
• Waste Management
• Water Infrastructure
• Intersectional Design
• Major Granting Agencies
• Peer-Reviewed Journals
• Universities

Formulating Research Questions

Research questions typically flow from research priorities (see Rethinking Research Priorities and Outcomes ) and from the theories and concepts that frame research (see Rethinking Concepts and Theories ). Research priorities—along with concepts and theories—directly influence how research is designed. They function to 

• 1. delimit questions asked—and, by implication, questions not asked (see, for example, Case Study: Genetics of Sex Determination ).
• 2. frame the research design and choice of methods.

As with other stages of the research and development processes, the choice of a research question is often underpinned by assumptions—both implicit and explicit—about sex and gender (see Method: Analyzing Gender ). As in other stages of research and development, potential for creative innovation lies in critically examining existing practices in light of available evidence about sex and gender (Bührer et al., 2006; Schraudner et al., 2006; Schiebinger, 2008; Wylie, et al., Klinge, 2010; IOM, 2010; Wajcman, 2010).

Critical questions for analyzing the significance (if any) of sex and gender in formulating research questions:

1. What is the current state of knowledge of sex and gender ( norms , identities , or relations ) in a given area of research or development?

2. What do we not know as a result of not analyzing sex and gender?

3. How have sex and gender functioned to limit the research questions posed in this field? For example, coronary angiography is a powerful diagnostic tool for assessing coronary artery disease, but it can cause bleeding complications, especially in women. Researchers asked how angiography could be made safer and designed and patented new catheters and procedures to allow angiography from the radial artery rather than the groin. This shift reduces bleeding in everyone (see Case Study: Heart Disease in Diverse Populations ).

4. Have assumptions been made about sex and gender? Are these justified in light of available evidence? Are assumptions underpinning these research questions invalid when subjected to critical analysis? For example, cultural assumptions about gender difference can lead companies to market “gender-specific” products—in one case a sex-specific knee prosthesis—that may not be the best choice for consumers (see Case Study: De-Gendering the Knee ). Have researchers assumed a sex or gender binary? For example, recent research suggests that some transgender people may be at higher risk for heart disease, but transgender patients are not typically a focus for heart disease research (see Case Study: Heart Disease in Diverse Populations ).

5. Have any potentially relevant groups of research subjects been left out (e.g., female animals in drug research, women and gender-diverse people in systems biology, pregnant women and large people in automotive engineering)? (See Case Studies: Prescription Drugs , Systems Biology , and Inclusive Crash Test Dummies .)

6. What research questions would lead to more robust research designs and methods? For example, in studies of sexual differentiation, geneticists have revealed the shortcomings of scientific models that portrayed the female developmental pathway as “passive.” By challenging assumptions of passivity, researchers formulated new questions about the ovarian developmental pathway. New findings now suggest that both female and male development are active, gene-mediated processes (see Case Study: Genetics of Sex Determination ).

Related Case Studies 

Works cited.

Bührer, S., Gruber, E., Hüsing, B., Kimpeler, S., Rainfurth, C., Schlomann, B., Schraudner, M., & Wehking, S. (2006). Wie Können Gender-Aspekte in Forschungsvorhaben Erkannt und Bewertet Werden? München: Fraunhofer.

Klinge, I., & Wiesemann, C. (Eds.) (2010). Sex and Gender in Biomedicine: Theories, Methodologies, and Results . Göttingen: Universitätsverlag.

Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2010). Women’s Health Research: Progress, Pitfalls, and Promise . Washington, D.C.: United States National Academies Press.

Schiebinger, L. (Ed.) (2014). Women and Gender in Science and Technology, 4 vols. London: Routledge.

Schraudner, M., & Lukoschat, H. (Eds.) (2006). Gender als Innovationspotenzial in Forschung and Entwicklung . Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institut.

Wajcman, J. (2010). Feminist Theories of Technology. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34 (1), 143-152 .

Wylie, A., & Conkey, M. (2007). Doing Archaeology as a Feminist. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 14 (3) , 209-216.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Surveys

Gender Survey Questions For Questionnaires

Understanding different genders’ unique viewpoints and experiences is critical for businesses, researchers, and organizations in the modern age. When conducting surveys or questionnaires, it is critical to include gender survey questions that are respectful, inclusive, and yield meaningful insights. 

In this blog, we will discuss the significance of gender questionnaires and give you a strategy for creating inclusive and effective gender questionnaires.

Content Index

What is the gender survey question?

Importance of gender survey questions in a questionnaire, why is there a need for more than two gender options in a questionnaire, transgender is an important category now, best practices for asking gender questions in a questionnaire.

Gender survey questions are a questionnaire that is asked of a participant to understand what is the gender of the respondent. 

Analysis of the survey responses and considering gender as a parameter will enable a researcher to evaluate how gender plays a role in the participant’s choices and help him deduce a pattern. 

Gender questionnaire questions are used in various types of research, such as business, social science research, etc. A survey question is one of the various types of survey questions that are most commonly asked in surveys.

Previously, only male and female options used to appear in such questions. However, with so many policies coming into place and with people accepting their genders freely, there are many more options. Gender questionnaire questions are sensitive. However, these can enable the researcher to analyze their data more accurately in their questionnaires .

With the growing importance of gender equality, it is important to phrase these questions in such a way that they do not offend any participants and provide a sense of inclusiveness to all gender categories.

A good survey design means it will accomplish two things: accuracy and inclusiveness. A questionnaire has to be designed so that it can collect accurate data using the best practices for survey designs and be inclusive at the same time. 

The questionnaire’s objective should be to make the participant feel that their opinion matters and will be valued as much as any other participant, without any biases.

LEARN ABOUT: Conformity Bias

The old method, where the gender questionnaire provided only two options, namely male and female, suggests that everyone falls under only these two categories, which is against the two things mentioned above. 

It suggests discrimination against transgender and non-conforming respondents, and many times the results achieved will not be accurate as there was no option given to the respondent. However, using a five-category question or a multi-step approach for gender data allows the participant to choose from various categories and also has the freedom to write an open-ended response. 

Such an option provides the researcher with much more accurate data and makes the respondent feel valued and respected. Furthermore, it will also increase the response rate for the questionnaire because the participant does not feel he is forced to answer certain questions, especially if they are private.

While conducting a survey, it doesn’t hurt to know your survey respondents a little more, like their age, sex, gender, etc. Questions based on gender have a precious impact on the results. It will enable you to derive results and study behavioral patterns according to gender and to make wise decisions for the purpose you are conducting your research. 

Asking gender questions enables you to ensure that your sample is representative or to study the gender effects on your research. Thus, using the age-old methods of asking gender questions of two options, if not altered, will keep giving you statistical data, which is not accurate, skipping important variations of responses based on gender and limiting understanding of the research .

Today’s social science research , public issues regarding gender discrimination, the rising consciousness of gender equality, and the movements around the world elucidate that giving two options or categorizing humans into two categories is outdated and ethically wrong.

Furthermore, considering the purpose of the survey, the analyses can be much more accurate if the demographic questions can be segmented into more than two categories.

For example, A cosmetic brand wants to survey to gather feedback about one of their products to help them market their product appropriately, depending on the audience. The feedback from a male will be different than that of a female. 

Furthermore, other categories, such as transgender, will also have a different opinion about the product and are also a considerable target audience for the cosmetic brand. 

Hence, a survey including gender questions having multiple choice options will give the company much more accurate data and make it easier to segment its audience and carry out appropriate marketing strategies based on the gender of the participants.

Start creating your own online surveys!

Our online software is trusted by some of the biggest brands in the world, and we have a FREE plan. Sign up now. See plans & features.

In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of transgenders, and they accommodate a significant portion of the population now. 

According to a 2016 study conducted in the United States, it was observed that 0.6% of all adults, or about 1.4 million people identify as transgender. So, on average, it is wise to expect that if a survey is sent to 500 participants, there will be at least 3 transgenders among them. Also, some states in the US have a higher density of transgender than 0.6%.

Furthermore, it has also been proven that transgender is not a trait you get once you are an adult, but it is a deeply held identity right from childhood. Hence, addressing transgender in gender questionnaire is vital to get accurate demographic information without offending the participants and also showcases non-discrimination.

Furthermore, multiple gender categories are evolving; hence, we can see many survey designers trying to implement these in their surveys. With so many options, it has become difficult for survey researchers to understand the need to collect valuable demographic data and balance it with appropriate gender choices. 

Although, while wording the question, a researcher has to ensure not to offend the participant and be respectful.

Following is an example of the number of choices that can be given in a gender choice question:

• Young woman
• Agender (no gender identity)
• Androgynous (not one specific sex)
• Gender fluid (different genders at different times)
• Bigender (two gender identities)
• Demi girl (partly girl)
• Demiboy (partly boy)
• Non-binary (not male or female)
• Genderqueer (non-traditional gender distinction)
• Trigender (shifts in three genders)
• Intersex (physical, hormonal, or genetic features of male
• Rather not say
• Other (please specify)

Considering the long list of genders accepted in today’s world, it is difficult to understand which have to be included and which are not. 

Although inclusivity of all options is vital, certainly, you cannot use the entire list, as surveys cannot be monotonous or exhaustive and should not take much time for the participant.

Moreover, you have a legal obligation to collect only the needed information. 

With data collection compliances (GDPR) coming into place, there will be tighter regulations to handle sensitive personal information. To understand when, how, and why to use a gender question for a questionnaire, you need to ask the following questions to yourself before designing a survey .

• Is there a need to ask the question at all?
• Should I ask about orientation and gender identity?
• How do I word my question?
• Does asking the question provide any business value?

One major confusion many people face is understanding the distinction between sex, sexual orientation, and gender. A researcher has to make sure the three questions are addressed separately. The distinction between these three points is as follows:

This refers to the anatomical characteristic of a person. When asking these questions, you should use options such as Male, Female, and Intersex.

Gender identity refers to what the person feels he is in a psychological sense, regardless of what sex a person was assigned at birth. 

Sexual orientation questions

This refers to emotional, physical, and sexual attraction to other people and does not fall under the gender question category but is affiliated with it. Words like gay/lesbian, bisexual/pansexual, and heterosexual can be used to discuss sexual preference. Please note it is advised not to use homosexual as it is frowned upon by most people.

There are many ways a gender identity question can be worded to suit specific needs. A couple of approaches can be used to ask current gender identity questions in a survey.

1st approach

If you find there is a need to ask a gender question, the following can be used.

• Others (Please specify)
• Other (Please specify)
• Not applicable

Using this approach enables a researcher to include transgender categories and also gives enough importance to mention any other gender identity. 

Moreover, using a multi-step approach is much faster to complete for a participant than using a single-step approach. Furthermore, adding ‘rather not say’ gives the participant a feeling that this is voluntary and not a forced question, which can give a good response rate for the survey.

2nd approach

If needed, an open-ended question can be asked.

• Gender?_____________

You may need to conduct text analysis for such a question; however, it is all-inclusive and will allow the participant to choose their own identity.

Apart from the decision to choose the approach, there are a few points that a researcher should not forget while using gender questions in a questionnaire. The following points will help you create a good survey design .

• Make sure you can justify why you are asking the question.
• Take into account the privacy and comfort of your participant over anything else.
• Maintain data security.
• Maintain anonymity of personal data.
• Try and include open-ended questions to give enough freedom to explain who they are.
• All gender questions are optional.

Understanding and recognizing our varied cultures requires gender-related questions in questionnaires. We can better understand gender identity-related issues by conducting inclusive and comprehensive questionnaires. Remember to offer options for different identities and respect respondents’ wishes to withhold information. 

QuestionPro is a popular online survey platform offering various features and tools for designing and delivering surveys, including the ability to add gender survey questionnaires. You may use QuestionPro to create surveys that target gender-related themes and collect vital data. Let’s work toward a world where gender identity is celebrated and accepted.

LEARN MORE         SIGN UP FREE

Frequently Asking Questions

Woman, man, transgender, and non-binary are gender-category responses. Chromosomes, hormones, and secondary traits define sex. Male, female, and intersex are typical sex response options.

 Gender questions in surveys may reveal gender tendencies. The survey is affected by these gender-related questions. Gender-specific surveys are sometimes done.

MORE LIKE THIS

Employee Engagement App: Top 11 For Workforce Improvement 

Apr 10, 2024

Top 15 Employee Evaluation Software to Enhance Performance

Event Feedback Software: Top 11 Best in 2024

Apr 9, 2024

Top 10 Free Market Research Tools to Boost Your Business

Other categories.

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Women’s Assessments of Gender Equality

Charles kurzman.

1 University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Brandon Gorman

2 University at Albany–SUNY, Albany, NY, USA

Karam Hwang

Renee ryberg.

3 Child Trends, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Batool Zaidi

Associated data.

Women’s assessments of gender equality do not consistently match global indices of gender inequality. In surveys covering 150 countries, women in societies rated gender-unequal according to global metrics such as education, health, labor-force participation, and political representation did not consistently assess their lives as less in their control or less satisfying than men did. Women in these societies were as likely as women in index-equal societies to say they had equal rights with men. Their attitudes toward gender issues did not reflect the same latent construct as in index-equal societies, although attitudes may have begun to converge in recent years. These findings reflect a longstanding tension between universal criteria of gender equality and an emphasis on subjective understandings of women’s priorities.

Who defines gender equality? Social analysts have long been split on this question. Universalist approaches define gender equality through indicators that apply to all societies, such as gender differences in health, education, political representation, and paid labor. These approaches, which we call index-equality , have been adopted by global indices that rank countries by such criteria. Subjectivist approaches, in contrast, focus on women’s priorities and experiences, even if some women’s perspectives may strike outsiders as none-galitarian. These approaches, which we call subjective-equality , are often adopted in cross-national surveys.

This article juxtaposes the two approaches, using seven global indices and six cross-national surveys, and finds a disconnect between index-equality—how countries rank on universal indicators of gender equality—and subjective-equality—how women report their own experiences and ideals. Women in societies that rank low in index-equality do not report consistently worse life experiences than men. They assess their country’s gender equality higher than in index-equal societies. At the same time, women’s attitudes toward gender equality in countries that rank low in index-equality do not hang together in the same way that they do for women in index-equal societies. Even on a high-profile issue such as violence against women, women in index-unequal societies may not express support for women’s rights, as defined by global institutions, although attitudes appear to have shifted on this subject over the past two decades.

In other words, gender-equality looks quite different from the perspective of women’s survey responses than it looks from the perspective of global gender-equality indices. This does not mean that universal indicators should be abandoned, but it highlights a complication that global indices overlook: Women around the world do not necessarily share the concept of gender-equality that these indices promote.

Two Centuries of Debate

The tension between universal definitions of gender equality and subjective definitions emerged in the late eighteenth century with the first proclamations of women’s rights in Western Europe. Olympe de Gouges (1971:6–7), a French revolutionary, published The Rights of Women as a companion piece to the Declaration of the Rights of Man, with equally universal aspirations: to recognize “the natural, inalienable, and sacred rights of the woman,” who “is born free and lives equal to man in rights.” Laws must apply equally to women and men. Women who are found guilty of capital crimes must be executed, just as men are; women who wish to participate in public life must be allowed to speak publicly, just as men are; women must be conscripted and taxed and employed as men are. Women’s property rights must be respected, as men’s are. These sentiments were revolutionary, and Gouges recognized that many women did not share her approach to gender equality. “Woman, awake,” she wrote, urging women to adopt her universal standards. “The tocsin of reason is making itself heard throughout the universe; recognize your rights” ( Gouges 1791 :11–12).

Similarly, Mary Wollstonecraft (1792) , an English radical and author of Vindication of the Rights of Women , also framed gender equality as a universal cause. She too recognized that many women did not share this cause; they were so “degraded” that they “despise the freedom which they have not sufficient virtue to struggle to attain.” Wollstonecraft acknowledged that it will “require some time to convince women that they act contrary to their real interest” (pp. 109–10, 96).

Other proponents of women’s rights adopted a different approach, focusing less on defining and promoting universal rights than on embracing existing priorities. Mary Anne Radcliffe (1799) , the English author of The Female Advocate; or an Attempt to Recover the Rights of Women from Male Usurpation , noted that not all women possess “the Amazonian spirit of a Wollstonecraft.” Rather than call on women to adopt such a spirit, she articulated what she deemed to be the current demands of Englishwomen: “not power, but protection” ( Radcliffe 1799 :44). Similarly, Hannah Mather Crocker (1818) in the United States, author of Observations on the Real Rights of Women , objected that Wollstonecraft’s approach was “unfit for practice.” She offered a religiously informed alternative vision of women’s empowerment in a “Christian system,” where “it is woman’s appropriate duty and particular privilege to cultivate the olive branches around her table,” which will “spread forth to form new circles in society” ( Crocker 1818 :41, 16–18).

The tension between universalist approaches to gender equality, like Gouges’s and Wollstonecraft’s, and subjectivist approaches, like Radcliffe’s and Crocker’s, arose again at the turn of the twentieth century, when women’s movements mobilized across the globe, emphasizing commonalities of interest among “women of all nations,” as stated in the founding document of the first international women’s rights organization, the International Council of Women ( Berkovitch 1999 :24; see also Rupp 1997 ). At the same time, some prominent activists rejected the notion of universal rights that transcended local priorities. A leader of the women’s movement in England, for example, refused to join the International Council of Women on the grounds that English women did not “have anything in common” with women in the United States and other countries, “the conditions of their lives and the purposes of their respective societies being so different” ( Berkovitch 1999 :25). In France, many advocates for women’s rights objected to Anglo-American visions of gender egalitarianism that they considered unsuitable for their own society ( Offen 1988 :144). A proponent of women’s rights in India, while translating a European statement for gender equality, argued for culturally specific adaptations “due to the difference between the societal system in the west and the societal system here” ( Botting and Kronewitter 2012 :485).

At the turn of the twenty-first century, universalist approaches to women’s rights began to be adopted by intergovernmental organizations, beginning with the Declaration on the Equality of Women, issued by the World Conference of the International Women’s Year in 1975, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979 ( Berkovitch 1999 :141–47). Since 1995, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has developed a series of metrics to measure gender inequality worldwide—part of a flurry of global ranking reports ( Cooley and Snyder 2015 ; Liebowitz and Zwingel 2014 )—culminating in the Gender Inequality Index (GII), which was introduced in 2010 (UNDP 2010:89–94).

These universalist approaches have been promoted disproportionately by women from wealthy societies of the Global North ( Hughes et al. 2018 ; Merry 2007 ), whose perspectives may not represent the priorities of women in the rest of the world. A number of women’s movements have raised subjectivist objections to universalist approaches to gender equality. These critiques include—among others—postmodern and postcolonial approaches that emphasize “the diversity of women’s agency” in place of “a universalized Western model of women’s liberation” ( Grewal and Kaplan 1994 :17); local feminisms that have “abandoned the myth of global sisterhood and acknowledged profound differences in women’s lives and in the meanings of feminism cross-nationally” ( Basu 1995 :3); multicultural feminisms that challenge hegemonic Euro-American formulations ( Mohanty 2003 ); and intersectional approaches that privilege “lived experience,” in all its variety, as the primary criterion for the analysis of inequalities ( Collins 2009 ).

Many of these subjectivist critiques share a “decolonizing” approach to feminism that replaces “general and abstract conceptions of gender and identity” with a focus on “important differences among local, cultural understandings of these ideas.” This approach seeks to build a transnational feminist movement based on “the complexity and richness of diversity of experiences and identities” while “challenging universalist methods, practices, and ways of knowing.” Transnational feminism involves “normative commitments. . . . However, just which set of normative commitments is continually open for debate” ( McLaren 2017 :2, 8, 9, 14).

For more than two centuries, these two visions, universalist and subjectivist, have grappled both with the definition of gender equality—does it comprise a single set of ideals or multiple sets?—and with the act of definition—who has a say in the process of identifying these ideals? This recurrent tension reflects a fundamental question about human dignity: whether to study people in terms of their own criteria of human value or in terms of the observer’s criteria. Debates on this subject often revolve around the extent to which people may be unaware of their own position or interests, as defined by the observer, possibly because of cultural convictions, false consciousness, hegemony, manipulation, brain-washing, ignorance, or the microphysics of power/ knowledge. Alternatively, utilitarians and phenomenologists accept subjective reports at face value and claim no grounds for disputing them. Between these positions, most social scientists try to sort out the relative merits of universalist and subjective judgments.

The tension between these judgments is the focus of considerable research. Zakia Salime (2011) and Brandon Gorman (2019) , for example, have explored the competition and interaction between women’s movements in North Africa that promote European-inspired ideals and movements that adopt Islamic discourses of gender equality. Rajaram and Zararia (2009) investigate three women’s rights organizations in one city in India—each group drawing on leftist, feminist, or local approaches to rights—that even use different words for rights. Peggy Levitt and colleagues (2013) , studying women’s organizations in Peru, note how global discourses became “vernacularized” in different ways at different periods in the country’s recent history. These qualitative studies highlight the contrast between universalist appeals to Western models and subjectivist appeals to the authenticity of alternative models.

However, most cross-national quantitative research on gender equality focuses either on universalist indicators, drawing on the growing body of national-level data, or subjective indicators, drawing on the large archive of cross-national individual and household surveys. Several studies have begun to address the tensions between universalist and subjective assessments of gender equality ( Foa and Tanner 2011 ; Hayes and Boyd 2017 ; Inglehart, Ponarin, and Inglehart 2017 ; Jayachandran 2015 ; Tesch-Römer, Motel-Klingebiel, and Tomasik 2008). These studies examined a single gender equality index and one (or in one study, two) cross-national surveys; the current article offers the robustness of multiple data sources, analyzing seven international indices of gender equality and six cross-national surveys.

To examine whether women’s experiences and attitudes track the universal definitions adopted by global indices of gender equality, we proceed in four stages, each of which involves distinct statistical analyses of the most relevant survey questions we were able to obtain. Each stage of the analysis compares universalist indices of gender equality with a different aspect of subjective equality:

• Do women in index-unequal societies report worse life experiences than men?
• Do women in index-unequal societies consider their countries less gender-equal than women in index-equal societies?
• Do women’s perceptions of gender equality reflect the same latent construct in different societies?
• Has women’s support for global ideals of gender equality diffused beyond index-equal societies?

These analyses find that gender equality looks quite different from the perspective of women’s survey responses than from the perspective of global indices. Women around the world do not necessarily share the concept of gender equality that universalist indices measure and promote. This study is descriptive rather than causal or normative. It does not attempt to explain these findings or advocate for either universalist or subjectivist approaches but instead documents tensions between these approaches, raising issues for future research.

The article draws on all available international gender equality indices and cross-regional surveys that include items relevant to women’s experience and attitudes. Among gender indices, we present our primary findings using the GII, the international community’s preeminent and most widely cited measure of women’s position in society. The United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Report has ranked each country on the basis of this index annually since 2010 and calculated the index retrospectively for the years 1995, 2000, and 2005. The GII is intended to combine “three critical dimensions for women—reproductive health, empowerment and labour market participation— . . . in one synthetic index” drawing on five indicators: maternal mortality ratio, adolescent birth rate, female-to-male ratios in secondary and higher education, women’s percentage of parliamentary seats, and women’s labor force participation ( UNDP 2010 ). These indicators are combined to create a single score for each country ( Gaye et al. 2010 ). This study has inverted and standardized the index so that positive scores reflect greater gender equality and negative scores reflect lesser gender equality, for consistency with other gender equality indices ( van Staveren 2013 ). Results for GII are presented in the main text; results for the following gender equality indices are discussed in the text and presented in the supplemental material (also standardized for comparison across indices) as checks for robustness:

Cingranelli-Richards ( Cingranelli, Richards, and Clay 2014 ) indices of women’s economic rights (WECON) and women’s political rights (WOPOL), part of the CIRI Human Rights Data Project, assessing each country for each year between 1981 and 2011; Gender Equality Index ( Foa and Tanner 2011 ), calculated for the years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010 as part of the Indices of Social Development produced by the International Institute of Social Studies at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, Netherlands; Global Gender Gap ( Schwab et al. 2015 , published by the World Economic Forum each year since 2006; Social Institutions and Gender Index ( Branisa, Klasen, and Ziegler 2009 ; Kolev, Nowacka, and Ferrant 2014 ; OECD Development Centre 2012), developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Centre, calculated for non-OECD countries in 2009, 2012, and 2014; Varieties of Democracy ( Coppedge et al. 2018 ), Women Political Empowerment Index, Version 8, covering each year from 1900 to 2017; World Bank (2018) , Country Policy and Institutional Assessment, Gender Equality Rating, available in the World Bank’s World Development Indicators data set, covering 75 to 81 poor countries in the years 2005 to 2014.

To compare index-equality with subjective-equality, we examined the six largest cross-regional, nationally representative surveys that we could identify and obtain, listed here in alphabetical order:

Demographic and Health Surveys (2018), fielded over many years in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East. A question on wife beating was asked in 67 countries with 2,505,490 respondents between 1997 and 2015. Gallup International Association (2000 , 2006 ), Voice of the People survey, a cross-national survey conducted almost every year since 2000. Questions about gender equality and related attitudes were asked in 2000 (53,273 respondents in 59 countries) and 2006 (60,593 respondents in 63 countries). Gallup World Poll (2016) , billed as the world’s largest survey and comprising annual samples in 166 countries over 2006 to 2015, with a total decade-long sample size of 1,558,530 respondents. Individual-level responses were not available for this study, which relies on the mean response for each gender for each country-year. Pew Global Attitudes Project (2009–2012) , with more than two dozen countries selected from every continent. A question on life satisfaction (2009) was asked in 25 countries, with 26,271 respondents, and questions on women’s rights (2010 and 2012) were asked in 28 countries, with 30,288 respondents. World Health Survey (2004) , fielded by the World Health Organization. A question on control over important matters in one’s life was asked in 47 countries in 2004, with 230,398 respondents. World Values Survey (2014) , waves 5 and 6, 2005 to 2014, the world’s most comprehensive cross-national social-scientific survey. A question on freedom was asked in 102 countries, with 332,996 respondents; a question on life satisfaction was asked in 103 countries, with 337,855 respondents; and a series of questions on gender-related attitudes were asked in 79 to 97 countries, with 155,652 to 292,270 respondents.

Within each survey, we draw on the items that speak most directly to women’s experiences of and attitudes toward gender equality. None of these items are included in more than one survey, so each survey is analyzed separately. Where multiple items speak to the same research question, the analyses are presented side by side as a check on the robustness of the findings from any single survey. Some of the survey items are binary, and others are ordinal; we have retained the original response categories. Survey items were reverse-coded where necessary to place universalist responses consistently at the same end of the scale.

For each survey, we identified individual characteristics for use as control variables in hierarchical models. For consistency across surveys, we recoded these characteristics (where available) as follows:

Age: in years (18–80); Educational attainment: no education (0), some primary (1), some secondary (2), some tertiary or more (3); Gender: man (0), woman (1); Household income (or household wealth, if income was not recorded): below median category or lowest tertile in each country (–1), median category or middle tertile (0), above median category or upper tertile (1); Religiosity: importance of religion in one’s life: not at all important (1), not very important (2), rather important (3), very important (4).

These surveys were merged with gender equality indices by country-year; where an index was not available for a given year, we used the index value for the adjacent year. (Results were similar without the inclusion of adjacent-year values.)

Do Women in Index-Unequal Societies Report Worse Life Experiences Than Men?

No, there are few significant differences in the life experience ratings of women and men in index-unequal societies.

To gauge subjective life experience, we identified all cross-national survey items aspiring to measure broad assessments of freedom, choice, control, and life satisfaction.

Control over one’s life:

Gallup World Poll, 2006–2015: In this country, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your freedom to choose what you do with your life? (0 = dissatisfied, 1 = satisfied). World Health Survey, 2004 (item Q8000): How often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life? Important things in life may be related to job, family, health (reverse-coded so that 1 = very often to 5 = never). World Values Survey, 2005–2014 (item A173): Some people feel they have completely free choice and control over their lives, while other people feel that what they do has no real effect on what happens to them. Please use this scale where 1 means no choice at all and 10 means a great deal of choice to indicate how much freedom of choice and control you feel you have over the way your life turns out. Life satisfaction: Gallup World Poll, 2006–2015: Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from 0 at the bottom to 10 at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you, and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. On which step of the ladder would you say you personally feel you stand at this time, assuming that the higher the step the better you feel about your life, and the lower the step the worse you feel about it? Which step comes closest to the way you feel? Pew Global Attitudes Project, 2009 (item Q2): Next, please tell me how satisfied you are with your life overall—would you say you are very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied? (reverse-coded so that 1 = very dissatisfied and 4 = very satisfied). World Values Survey, 2005–2014 (item A170): All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days? Using this card on which 1 means you are completely dissatisfied and 10 means you are completely satisfied, where would you put your satisfaction with your life as a whole?

Country-level means of women’s and men’s responses to these questions tracked one another closely, with women reporting slightly less control and slightly greater satisfaction than men ( Figures S1 – S8 in supplemental material ). On a global scale, these results confirmed findings of previous studies on gender differences in these indicators ( Arrosa and Gandelman 2016 ; Graham and Chattopadhyay 2013 ; Matteucci and Vieira Lima 2014; Meisenberg and Woodley 2015 ; Seguino 2007 ; Tesch-Römer et al. 2008 ; Zuckerman, Li, and Diener 2017 ; Zweig 2015 ).

Universalist approaches to gender equality lead us to expect women to report less positive life assessments than men in countries that are less index-equal. However, individual-level hierarchical linear models controlling for age, education, household income, and religiosity (where available) failed to find a consistent correlation between index-equality and gender differences in life assessment ( Tables S1 – S8 in supplemental material ). The marginal effect of being a woman, displayed across different levels of the Gender Inequality Index in Figure 1 , shows that in three of four survey items, women assessed their lives no more negatively, relative to men’s assessments, in index-unequal countries than in index-equal countries. The exception was the World Values Survey item on control over one’s life ( Figure 1 B). Other global gender indices generated similar patterns of marginal effects ( Figure S9 in supplemental material ). Further details of this and the article’s other analyses are available on request.

Marginal effect of being a woman on self-assessment of control and life satisfaction.

These results constitute an important nonfinding consistent with several similar studies on this subject using a variety of indicators ( Graham and Chattopadhyay 2013 ; Matteucci and Vieira Lima 2014 ; Meisenberg and Woodley 2015 ): Women do not consistently report lower levels of control or satisfaction than men in countries that global gender indices rate as gender-unequal.

We leave possible explanations for this nonfinding for future research. Here, we turn next to a survey question that asked women directly if their society had achieved gender equality.

Do Women in Index-Unequal Societies Consider Their Countries Less Gender-Equal Than Women in Index-Equal Societies?

No, women in index-unequal societies were more likely than women in index-equal societies to report that women have equal rights with men in their country.

We were able to identify only one cross-national survey that included a direct assessment of gender equality in the respondent’s country:

Gallup International Association, 2006 (item Q9A): I’d like you to tell me whether you agree or disagree? Women have equal rights with men in [your country] (reverse-coded so that 0 = disagree and 1 = agree).

Women’s responses to this question did not match well with global gender indices. In fact, the bivariate correlation (−.32) and Spearman’s rank-order correlation (−.33) between these percentages and the Gender Inequality Index (inverted so that higher values indicate more gender equality) were negative and statistically significant: Fewer women considered women to have equal rights with men in index-equal countries than in countries that the index rated as gender-unequal. Figure 2 illustrates this disparity: Countries that ranked high on index-equality (the top of the right column) often ranked low on subjective-equality (the bottom of the left column) and vice versa. None of the other gender-equality indices were positively correlated with women’s assessments of gender-equality, either in the 2006 survey or with slightly different question wording in 2000 ( Figures S10 , S11 in supplemental material ). This finding is confirmed in hierarchical linear models, controlling for individual-level age and education and the country-level percentage of men rating the country gender-equal ( Tables S9 , S10 in supplemental material ).

Comparing survey-based and index-based rankings of gender equality, 2005–2006. The left column lists countries from most gender-equal to least gender-equal, based on women’s responses to a 2006 Gallup International Association survey. The right column lists countries from most gender-equal to least gender-equal, based on the 2005 Gender Inequality Index. Steep lines connecting the two columns indicate mismatches between women’s subjective rankings and the index’s universalistic rankings.

This finding suggests that women in index-unequal countries may conceive of gender equality differently than the factors that are included in gender-equality indices. To examine whether that is the case, we turn to the cross-regional survey with the largest number of gender-related questions.

Do Women’s Perceptions of Gender Equality Reflect the Same Latent Construct in Different Societies?

No, women’s conceptualization of gender equality in index-equal countries does not reflect women’s conceptualizations in index-unequal countries.

Recent waves of the World Values Survey included eight questions on gender-related attitudes, the most of any largescale cross-regional survey:

• World Values Survey, 2005–2014 (responses were recoded when needed to align the high end of the scale with the expectations of index-equality):
• When jobs are scarce, men should have more right to a job than women (recoded so that 1 = agree, 2 = neither, 3 = disagree) (item C001).
• Being a housewife is just as fulfilling as working for pay (1 = strongly agree, 4 = strongly disagree) (item D057).
• On the whole, men make better political leaders than women do (1 = strongly agree, 4 = strongly disagree) (item D059).
• A university education is more important for a boy than for a girl (1 = strongly agree, 4 = strongly disagree) (item D060).
• Men make better business executives than women do (1 = strongly agree, 4 = strongly disagree) (item D078).
• I am going to name a number of organizations. For each one, could you tell me how much confidence you have in them: Is it a great deal of confidence, quite a lot of confidence, not very much confidence or none at all? The women’s movement (reverse-coded so that 1 = none at all, 4 = a great deal) (item E069.15).
• Many things are desirable, but not all of them are essential characteristics of democracy. Please tell me for each of the following things how essential you think it is as a characteristic of democracy: Women have the same rights as men (combined with the question “Having a democratic political system”; recoded so that 1 = an essential characteristic of democracy and democratic political system very good or fairly good; 0 for other responses) (items E233 and E217).
• Please tell me for each of the following statements whether you think it can always be justified, never be justified, or something in between: For a man to beat his wife (reverse-coded so that 1 = always justifiable, 10 = never justifiable) (item F199).

Several recent studies have questioned the measurement invariance of gender attitudes in cross-national surveys ( André, Gesthuizen, and Scheepers 2013 ; Constantin and Voicu 2015 ; Inglehart and Norris 2003 ; Lomazzi 2018 ; van Vlimmeren, Moors, and Gelissen 2017 ; Weziak-Bialowolska 2015 ). Most of these studies aimed to overcome measurement invariance issues to construct a single cross-national index of subjective-equality. Our approach is different. Rather than assess whether a single latent construct of subjective-equality exists throughout the world, we seek to examine whether women’s subjective understandings of gender inequality in different countries are associated with index-equality. The traditional method to assess measurement invariance involves multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). To explore patterns of model fit across countries, however, we ran CFA models for each country-year separately ( Figure S12 in supplemental material ). This approach had the advantage of retaining all the country-years in which these items were included, whereas multigroup CFA models did not converge when all countryyears were analyzed simultaneously. Our CFA models treated the items as categorical variables, except the 10-point scale on wife beating, and were estimated using the weighted least squares means and variance adjusted estimator (WLSMV) to account for the categorical nature of the survey items.

We then plotted the fit statistics from these 96 CFAs against index-equality measures to examine the association between model fit and index-equality. The primary fit statistic for the model, the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), is plotted in Figure 3 against the Global Inequality Index. A BIC score above 0 is considered an unacceptably poor fit; the more negative the BIC score, the better the fit ( Raftery 1995 ). 1 Shading of the scatterplot indicates the number of other fit statistics that are considered satisfactory: Comparative Fit Index (CFI) > .95, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) > .95, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) < .05 ( Bollen forthcoming ; Cheung and Rensvold 2002 ; Hooper, Coughlan, and Mullen 2008 ). Because of the large sample sizes, we do not report whether chi-square p value > .05, but the pattern is similar if this additional fit statistic is also included. (The fit statistics for each countryyear are listed in Table S11 in supplemental material. )

Fit statistics for women’s latent gender-equality attitudes by country. Countries rated as more gender-unequal by the Gender Inequality Index (left) are more likely than countries rated as more gender-equal (right) to have positive Bayesian Information Criterion statistics for gender-related attitudes in the World Values Survey (2005–2014), indicating worse model fit. Other fit statistics display the same pattern: Fewer of them pass standard thresholds in index-unequal countries than in index-equal countries.

As illustrated by the downward-sloping fitted line in Figure 3 , the World Values Survey’s gender-equality items hang together far better in index-equal countries than in countries that the Gender Inequality Index rated low on gender equality. The BIC is far more negative—indicating that the indicators are more likely to measure a single latent construct—in the countries of northwest Europe, for example, than in recently decolonized countries. The other fit statistics display this pattern as well, as do the results when plotted against all but one of the other gender equality indices ( Figure S13 in supplemental material ). Similar findings emerge with men. None of the eight items’ significance levels is correlated with index-equality, so differences in fit are not due to any particular item but to respondents’ overall understandings of gender equality, as reflected in the model fit.

We propose that measurement invariance has substantive implications: Differences in fit suggest that gender-related questions in the World Values Survey do not represent the same single underlying gender-equality attitude outside of index-equal countries.

Thus far, the data sets have limited us to cross-sectional analyses. To explore the possibility of change in women’s attitudes toward gender-equality, we turn to a set of gender-related survey items that have been fielded in multiple world regions for the longest span of time.

Has Women’s Support for Global Ideals of Gender Equality Diffused beyond Index-Equal Societies?

Yes, at least one global ideal of gender equality, opposition to wife beating, appears to have diffused recently beyond index-equal societies.

The right not to be beaten by one’s husband emerged from a feminist emphasis on women’s physical security ( Merry 2007 ; Schechter 1982 ; Tierney 1982 ). This right has become widely acknowledged over the past half-century but not universally so, as shown in a series of questions asked in the Demographic and Health Survey over the past two decades:

Demographic and Health Survey, 1997–2014 (items v744a–v744e) (recoded as a single variable so that 0 = justified in any or all of the scenarios, 1 = justified in none of the scenarios):

• Wife beating is justified if she burns the food, 0 = not justified, 1 = justified.
• Wife beating is justified if she argues with him, 0 = not justified, 1 = justified.
• Wife beating is justified if she goes out without telling him, 0 = not justified, 1 = justified.
• Wife beating is justified if she neglects the children, 0 = not justified, 1 = justified.
• Wife beating is justified if she refuses to have sex with him, 0 = not justified, 1 = justified.

We follow the logic of each of these items and treat the series of questions as a binary: whether wife beating is justified or not under any of these scenarios. (Similar findings result from an additive scale that assumes each item is equally important.) As several studies have noted, the wording in these items is ambiguous: Some respondents may have understood justified to mean that wife beating was condoned by the community at large, and respondents may have differed in their interpretation of the scenarios ( Shuler, Lenzi, and Yount 2011 ; Shuler, Yount, and Lenzi 2012 ; Yount et al. 2013 ). Notwithstanding these ambiguities, two clear findings emerge from these surveys. First, a large proportion of women in some countries considered some wife beating justified under some circumstances, including a majority of women in 43 of 120 country-years where these questions were asked. Second, there was a clear rise over the past two decades in responses treating wife beating as not justified in all of the scenarios presented in the survey ( Pierotti 2013 ). (A similar pattern was visible for men as well in the smaller number of samples that included men.)

The turn against wife beating was not due to cohort replacement (younger women replacing the older generation in the survey sample): In fact, as shown in hierarchical linear models in Table 1 , older women were slightly more likely to call wife beating unjustified than younger women (confirming findings in Pierotti 2013 ; Waltermauer 2012 ; contrary to findings in Hayes and Boyd 2017 ). The coefficient for age is also positive and statistically significant when education is removed from the models.

Hierarchical Linear Model of Women’s Opposition to Wife Beating.

Survey data source : Demographic and Health Survey.

Note : Gender Inequality Index is inverted and standardized for consistency with other gender indices. Standard errors are listed in parentheses below coefficients.

Over the same time period, index-equality also increased in these countries, but that does not appear to have driven the dramatic changes in survey responses. In early surveys ( Table 1 , Model 1), the Gender Inequality Index was significantly associated with women’s likelihood to consider wife beating unjustified: Opposition to wife beating was more widespread in countries with higher index-equality. Beginning around 2010 (other cut-points worked equally well), this association was smaller and no longer statistically significant ( Table 1 , Model 2). Similar results emerged with other global indices of gender equality: In surveys since 2010, the association between index-equality and women’s opposition to wife beating was smaller in magnitude and/or less statistically significant than in surveys prior to 2010 for all but one of eight indices ( Tables S12 – S18 in supplemental material ). In recent years, opposition to wife beating seems to have diffused beyond the index-equal countries where it used to be concentrated.

There has long been a mismatch between the priorities of universalist gender-equality activists and the priorities of many of the women on whose behalf they mobilize, dating back to the origins of feminism in the late eighteenth century. This mismatch highlights a fundamental tension between the universalist value of gender egalitarianism as reflected in global gender indices and the subjectivist value of empowering women to pursue their own priorities, which may or may not include gender egalitarianism.

This article documents four empirical aspects of this mismatch, comparing seven global indices of gender equality and women’s responses to six cross-national surveys over the past two decades. We label these two contrasting approaches to gender equality as index-equality —global measures of egalitarian gender arrangements—and subjective-equality —how women experience and personally evaluate aspects of gender equality.

We find that index-equality was not consistently associated with women’s experience of control over their lives or life satisfaction relative to men’s experiences. In societies that were index-unequal—that is, societies where global advocates considered women worst off—women reported similar levels of life satisfaction as men and similar levels of control over their lives.

According to Gallup International Association surveys, women in index-unequal societies called their countries gender-equal as often as and sometimes more often than women in index-equal societies. In the World Values Survey, women’s responses on eight gender equality questions were less likely in index-unequal societies than in index-equal societies to form a single latent construct, casting doubt on the presence of a single, underlying latent attitude toward gender equality.

Still, women’s attitudes on gender equality may be shifting. Over the past two decades, women have become more likely to consider wife beating unjustified, according to data from the Demographic and Health Survey. Prior to 2010, women’s responses on this subject were correlated with index-equality: Women in index-equal societies were more likely than women in index-unequal societies to consider wife beating unjustified. Since then, however, this correlation has weakened, suggesting that opposition to wife beating may have spread from its origins in Western universalist feminism to index-unequal societies as well.

This article does not address possible causes of this shift or the normative implications, which we leave for future research. Instead, we offer these findings as descriptive documentation of tensions between two visions of gender equality.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments.

We thank Catherine Zimmer for her assistance with statistical modeling.

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Willa Dong was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (5T32AI007001–42, PI: Adaora Adimora). Renee Ryberg received support from the Population Research Training grant (T32 HD007168) and the Population Research Infrastructure Program (P2C HD050924) awarded to the Carolina Population Center at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the stance of the funding agencies.

Author Biographies

Charles Kurzman is a professor of sociology and co-director of the Center for Middle East and Islamic Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is author of The Missing Martyrs (first edition, 2011; second edition, 2019), Democracy Denied, 1905 – 1915 (2008), and The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran (2004) and editor of the anthologies Liberal Islam (1998) and Modernist Islam, 1840 – 1940 (2002).

Willa Dong is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Health Behavior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her research focuses on the impact of stigma on health for global LGBT populations.

Brandon Gorman is an assistant professor of sociology at the University at Albany, State University of New York. He studies culture, conflict, and collective identification in the Middle East and around the world. He is currently conducting research on the relationship between disgust and dehumanization, the causes and consequences of ethnic boundary construction in Africa, and the impact of political exclusion on interpersonal trust.

Karam Hwang is a doctoral candidate in the Sociology Department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her current research examines how individual and contextual factors jointly produce varying patterns of sociability on college campuses.

Renee Ryberg is a research scientist in the education research area at Child Trends. She is focused on conducting research to understand how youth make the transition from adolescence to adulthood in order to help them flourish as adults.

Batool Zaidi is an assistant professor of sociology at Western Washington University. She studies gender inequality and demographic change in the global south.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

• André Stéphanie, Gesthuizen Maurice, and Scheepers Peer. 2013. “ Support for Traditional Female Roles across 32 Countries: Female Labour Market Participation, Policy Models and Gender Differences .” Comparative Sociology 12 ( 4 ):447–76. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arrosa María Laura, and Gandelman Néstor. 2016. “ Happiness Decomposition: Female Optimism .” Journal of Happiness Studies 17 ( 2 ):731–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Basu Amrita, ed. 1995. The Challenge of Local Feminisms: Women’s Movements in Global Perspective . Boulder, CO: Westview. [ Google Scholar ]
• Berkovitch Nitza. 1999. From Motherhood to Citizenship: Women’s Rights and International Organizations . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bollen Kenneth A. Forthcoming . Foundations of Structural Equation Models . [ Google Scholar ]
• Botting Eileen Hunt, and Kronewitter Sean. 2012. “ Westernization and Women’s Rights: Non-Western European Responses to Mill’s Subjection of Women, 1869–1908 .” Political Theory 40 ( 4 ):466–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Branisa Boris, Klasen Stephan, and Ziegler Maria. 2009. “ Background Paper: The Construction of the Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) .” University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, Goettingen, Germany. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheung Gordon W., and Rensvold Roger B.. 2002. “ Evaluating Goodness-of-Fit Indexes for Testing Measurement Invariance .” Structural Equation Modeling 9 ( 2 ):233–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cingranelli David L., Richards David L., and Clay K. Chad. 2014. “ The CIRI Human Rights Dataset .” http://www.humanrightsdata.com . Version 2014.04.14.
• Collins Patricia Hill. 2009. Black Feminist Thought . New ed. New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Constantin Andreea, and Voicu Malina. 2015. “ Attitudes towards Gender Roles in Cross-Cultural Surveys: Content Validity and Cross-Cultural Measurement Invariance .” Social Indicators Research 123 ( 3 ):733–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooley Alex, and Snyder Jack, eds. 2015. Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coppedge Michael, Gerring John, Carl Henrik Knutsen Staffan I. Lindberg, Skaaning Svend-Erik, Teorell Jan, Altman David, Bernhard Michael, Fish M. Steven, and Agnes Cornell, et al. 2018. “ V-Dem Country-Year Dataset v8.1 .” Gothenberg, Sweden: Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. [ Google Scholar ]
• Crocker H.Mather 1818. Observations on the Real Rights of Women . Boston: For the author. [ Google Scholar ]
• Demographic and Health Surveys. 2016. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development. http://dhsprogram.com/data/.
• Demographic and Health Surveys. 2018. Rockville, MD: The DHS Program.
• Foa Roberto, and Tanner Jeffery C.. 2011. Methodology of the Indices of Social Development. Rotterdam, Netherlands: International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gallup International Association. 2000. Voice of the People, 2000 (ICPSR 24661) . http://icpsr.umich.edu .
• Gallup International Association. 2006. Voice of the People, 2006 (ICPSR 21380) . http://icpsr.umich.edu .
• Gallup World Poll. 2016. Gallup World Poll . Washington, DC: Gallup. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaye Amie, Klugman Jeni, Kovacevic Milorad, Twigg Sarah, and Zambrano Eduardo. 2010. “ Measuring Key Disparities in Human Development: The Gender Inequality Index .” Research Paper 2010/46. United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Reports. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gorman Brandon. 2019. “ Global Norms vs. Global Actors: International Politics, Muslim Identity, and Support for Shari’a .” Sociological Forum 34 ( 1 ):91–114. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gouges Olympe de. 1791. Les droits de la femme N.p. [ Google Scholar ]
• Graham Carol, and Chattopadhyay Soumya. 2013. “ Gender and Well-Being around the World .” International Journal of Happiness and Development 1 ( 2 ):212–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grewal Inderpal, and Kaplan Caren, eds. 1994. Scattered Hegemonies: Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes Brittany E., and Boyd Katharine A.. 2017. “ Influence of Individual- and National-Level Factors on Attitudes toward Intimate Partner Violence .” Sociological Perspectives 60 ( 4 ):685–701. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hooper Daire, Coughlan Joseph, and Mullen Michael. 2008. “ Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit .” Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6 ( 1 ):53–60. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hughes Melanie M., Paxton Pamela, Quinsaat Sharon, and Reith Nicholas. 2018. “ Does the Global North Still Dominate the Women’s International Organizing? A Network Analysis from 1978 to 2008 .” Mobilization 23 ( 1 ):1–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Inglehart Ronald F., Ponarin Eduard, and Inglehart Ronald C.. 2017. “ Cultural Change, Slow and Fast: The Distinctive Trajectory of Norms Governing Gender Equality and Sexual Orientation .” Social Forces 95 ( 4 ):1313–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Inglehart Ronald, and Norris Pippa. 2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jayachandran Seema. 2015. “ The Roots of Gender Inequality in Developing Countries .” Annual Review of Economics 7 :63–88. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolev Alexandre, Nowacka Keiko, and Ferrant Gaëlle. 2014. SIGI Social Institutions and Gender Index: 2014 Synthesis Report . Paris: OECD Development Centre. [ Google Scholar ]
• Levitt Peggy, Merry Sally, Alayza Rosa, and Mercedes Crisóstomo Meza. 2013. “Doing Vernacularization: The Encounter between Global and Local ideas about Women’s Rights in Peru.” Pp. 127–42 in Feminist Strategies in International Governance , edited by Caglar G, Prügl E, and Zwingel S. London: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liebowitz Debra J., and Zwingel Susanne. 2014. “ Gender Equality Oversimplified: Using CEDAW to Counter the Measurement Obsession .” International Studies Review 16 ( 3 ):362–89. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lomazzi Vera. 2018. “ Using Alignment Optimization to Test the Measurement Invariance of Gender Role Attitudes in 59 Countries .” Methods, Data, Analyses 12 ( 1 ):77–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Matteucci Nicola, and Sabrina Vieira Lima. 2014. “ Women and Happiness .” MPRA Paper No. 60875 . [ Google Scholar ]
• McLaren Margaret A., ed. 2017. Decolonizing Feminism: Transnational Feminism and Globalization . London: Rowman & Littlefield. [ Google Scholar ]
• Meisenberg Gerhard, and Woodley Michael A.. 2015. “ Gender Differences in Subjective Well-Being and Their Relationships with Gender Equality .” Journal of Happiness Studies 16 ( 6 ):1539–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Merry Sally E. 2007. Human Rights and Gender Violence . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mohanty Chandra Talpade. 2003. Feminism without Borders . Durham, NC: Duke University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD Development Centre. 2012. 2012 SIGI: Social Institutions and Gender Index . Paris: OECD Development Centre. [ Google Scholar ]
• Offen Karen. 1988. “ Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach .” Signs 14 ( 1 ):119–57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pew Global Attitudes Project. 2009–2012. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center http://www.pewglobal.org/datasets/ .
• Pierotti Rachael S. 2013. “ Increasing Rejection of Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence of Global Cultural Diffusion .” American Sociological Review 78 ( 2 ):240–65. [ Google Scholar ]
• Radcliffe Mary Anne. 1799. The Female Advocate; or an Attempt to Recover the Rights of Women from Male Usurpation . London: Vernor and Hood. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raftery Adrian E. 1995. “ Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research .” Sociological Methodology 25 :111–63. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rajaram N, and Vaishali Zararia. 2009. “ Translating Women’s Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Spiral Process in Reducing Gender Injustice in Baroda, India .” Global Networks 9 ( 4 ):462–84. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rupp Leila J. 1997. Worlds of Women: The Making of an International Women’s Movement . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Salime Zakia. 2011. Between Feminism and Islam: Human Rights and Sharia Law in Morocco . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schechter Susan. 1982. Women and Male Violence: The Visions and Struggles of the Battered Women’s Movement . Boston: South End Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwab Klaus, et al. 2015. The Global Gender Gap Report 2015: 10th Anniversary Edition . Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seguino Stephanie. 2007. “ Plus Ça Change? Evidence on Global Trends in Gender Norms and Stereotypes .” Feminist Economics 13 ( 2 ):1–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shuler Sidney Ruth, Lenzi Rachel, and Yount Kathryn M.. 2011. “ Justification of Intimate Partner Violence in Rural Bangladesh: What Survey Questions Fail to Capture .” Studies in Family Planning 42 ( 1 ):21–28. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shuler Sidney Ruth, Yount Kathryn M., and Lenzi Rachel. 2012. “ Justification of Wife Beating in Rural Bangladesh .” Violence Against Women 18 ( 10 ):1177–91. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tesch-Römer Clemens, Andreas Motel-Klingebiel, and Tomasik Martin J.. 2008. “ Gender Differences in Subjective Well-Being: Comparing Societies with Respect to Gender Equality .” Social Indicators Research 85 ( 2 ):329–49. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tierney Kathleen J. 1982. “ The Battered Women Movement and the Creation of the Wife Beating Problem .” Social Problems 20 ( 3 ):207–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations Development Programme. 2010. Human Development Report 2010 . Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. [ Google Scholar ]
• van Staveren Irene. 2013. “ To Measure Is to Know? A Comparative Analysis of Gender Indices .” Review of Social Economy 71 ( 3 ):339–72. [ Google Scholar ]
• van Vlimmeren Eva, Moors Guy B. D., and Gelissen John P. T. M.. 2017. “ Clusters of Cultures: Diversity in Meaning of Family Value and Gender Role Items Across Europe .” Quality & Quantity 51 ( 6 ):2737–60. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waltermaurer Eve. 2012. “ Public Justification of Intimate Partner Violence: A Review of the Literature .” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 13 ( 3 ):167–75. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weziak-Bialowolska Dorota. 2015. “ Differences in Gender Norms between Countries: Are They Valid? The Issue of Measurement Invariance .” European Journal of Population 31 ( 1 ):51–76. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wollstonecraft Mary. 1792. Vindication of the Rights of Women . London: J. Johnson. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bank World. 2018. World Development Indicators . Washington, DC: World Bank. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Health Survey. 2004. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/en/ .
• World Values Survey. 2014. World Values Survey: Longitudinal Dataset, 1981–2014, v.20141125 Madrid, Spain: World Values Survey Association. www.worldvaluessurvey.org . Aggregate File Producer: JDSystems. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yount Kathryn M., Halim Nafisa, Schuler Sidney, and Head Sara. 2013. “ A Survey Experiment of Women’s Attitudes about Intimate Partner Violence against Women in Rural Bangladesh .” Demography 50 ( 1 ):333–57. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuckerman Miron, Li Chen, and Diener Edward F.. 2017. “ Societal Conditions and the Gender Difference in Well-Being .” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 43 ( 3 ):329–36. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zweig Jacqueline S. 2015. “ Are Women Happier Than Men? Evidence from the Gallup World Poll .” Journal of Happiness Studies 16 ( 2 ): 515–41. [ Google Scholar ]

76 Gender Equality Essay Topics

🏆 best essay topics on gender equality, ✍️ gender equality essay topics for college, 👍 good gender equality research topics & essay examples, 🎓 most interesting gender equality research titles.

• Women and Men Empowerment for Gender Equality
• Speech of Emma Watson: Gender Equality
• Multiculturalism as a Threat to Gender Equality
• Addressing the Issue of Gender Equality
• Contemporary Gender Equality Challenge
• Gender Equality Strategies in Education
• “Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment” by Kabeer
• Global Misunderstanding of the Idea of Feminism and Gender Equality Global misunderstanding of the idea of feminism and gender equality in education leads to devastating consequences that cannot be allowed.
• Gender Equality and Women’s Rights The issue of gender equality in society has gained popularity in the course of the precedent century with the rise of the feminist movement and women’s struggle for equal rights.
• “Women’s Assessments of Gender Equality Critique” by Kurzman This article explains how women’s assessment of gender equality does not continually match with the worldwide indices of gender inequality.
• Gender Equality in Britain in the 20th Century In Britain, the media through the television systems operated discussions and seminars on issues concerning gender in society.
• Sex and Gender Equality in a Personal Worldview The debate about sex, gender, and associated issues is integral to contemporary society. Inequalities are the consequences of socially constructed concepts.
• Issues in Sports: Gender Equality Numerous societies have not recognized that women have the flair to take part in any sport that a man can do, with equivalent expertise if not best.
• Gender Equality: Language and Literature The universal human rights principles propound that every person must be treated equally before the law regardless of their gender.
• Gender Equality Cannot Be a Universal Concept This paper addresses whether gender equality is a universal concept that needs to strive across regions and cultures or whether it should have different meanings.
• Toxic Masculinity and Gender Equality in the US Masculinity has historically been associated with power, leadership, and wealth. Yet, it becomes toxic when it starts to form particular social expectations from men.
• Gender Equality: Do Women Have Equal Rights? Although developed countries demonstrate higher levels of gender equality than states that openly discriminate against women, the equality climate in the U.S. remains imperfect.
• Gender Equality in the Media Workforce Gender equality has come a long way since what it had been 40 years ago that’s why denying the progress is pointless, as many changes were made, for the better.
• Gender Equality as Smart Economics’ Policy Agenda After assessing the available trends and data, it is reasonable to conclude that in the world of the future, the gender gap will be even narrower
• What Makes an Ideal Society? Revolutionary Ideas for Gender Equality The article is relevant because it demonstrates how a perfect society can be achieved by first realizing social change, as it was done before the women’s movements.
• Integration of Gender Equality in Organizational Management In essence, the integration of gender equality in management practices would help advance modern employee rights among organizations.
• Gender Equality: Men as Daycare Professionals Gender equality campaigns have traditionally been focused on making “predominantly male professions accessible to everyone” without paying attention to the opposite situations.
• “Is Gender Equality the Silent Killer of Marriages?” Article Analysis The article “Is Equality Ruining Your Marriage?” by Suzanne Venker explores the adverse effects of integrating egalitarian concepts in the marriage context.
• Woman and Gender Equality in Canada With the modernization of society, there is a need for additional measures to ensure the rights of women all over the country.
• Ethical Dilemma of Worldwide Gender Equality One of the most significant issues in the context of the 21st century, however, is the ethical dilemma of worldwide gender equality.
• Economic Benefits of Gender Equality in the European Union Gender inequality is a highly complex and extensive social issue which is prevalent in every layer of society and industry.
• Gender and Gender Equality: Prejudice and Lack of Understanding
• Well-Being and Social Development in the Context of Gender Equality
• Accounting for Gender Equality in Secondary School Enrollment in Africa
• Capabilities, Opportunities, and Participation: Gender Equality and Development in the Middle East and North Africa Region
• Gender Equality and ‘Austerity’: Vulnerabilities, Resistance and Change
• Aid for Gender Equality and Development: Lessons and Challenges
• The Relation Between Gender Equality and Economic Growth
• Gender Equality: Women Serving Less Time Than Men for Identical Crimes
• Islam and Gender Equality in Turkey
• Development Versus Legacy: The Relative Role of Development and Historical Legacies in Achieving Gender Equality
• Parental Leave and Gender Equality: Lessons From the European Union
• Gender Equality and the Labor Market: Cambodia, Kazakhstan, and the Philippines
• The Connections Between International Politics and Gender Equality Issues
• Analyzing Gender Equality and Gender Discrimination
• Promoting Gender Equality and Empowering Women
• Gender Equality and Electoral Violence in Africa: Unlocking the Peacemaking Potential of Women
• Striving for Gender Equality and Closing the Wage Gap
• Empowering Boys and Men to Achieve Gender Equality in India
• Changes and Policies That Can Help Women Get Gender Equality
• Economic Growth and Evolution of Gender Equality
• The 1970s Feminist Movement in America and Its Fight for Gender Equality
• Gender Equality Through Epochs
• Attitudes Towards Gender Equality and Perception of Democracy in the Arab World
• Equal Opportunity for All: Gender Equality
• Gender Equality and Economic Development: The Role of Information and Communication Technologies
• Gender Equality and Gender Roles in the Workplace
• Feminism and the Truth Behind Gender Equality in Society
• Active Ageing and Gender Equality
• Social Norms and Teenage Smoking: The Dark Side of Gender Equality
• Gender Equality Work and Domestic Life
• What Factors Might Encourage Organizations to Adopt Gender Equality Initiatives
• Poverty and Gender Equality in Pakistan
• Suffrage, Democracy, and Gender Equality in Education
• Domestic Work, Wages, and Gender Equality: Lessons From Developing Countries
• Gender Equality During the 19th Century
• Boundless Possibilities and Gender Equality
• Globalization and Gender Equality in Developing Countries
• Societal Stockholm Syndrome: The Gender Equality Myth
• Biological, Physiological, and Biochemical Facts About Gender Equality
• Empowering Women and Promoting Gender Equality
• Revisiting Jewson and Mason: The Politics of Gender Equality in UK Local Government in a Cold Climate
• Gender Equality and Civil Rights in the USA
• The Goals and Ways of Achieving Gender Equality
• American History, Gender Equality, and Gender Exploitation
• Men and Gender Equality: European Insights
• Transgender and Gender Equality Within the United States
• Feminism and Gender Equality: From the Earth’s Beginnings
• Gender Equality and Its Effects on Women’s Rights
• Decomposing Vietnamese Gender Equality in Terms of Wage Distribution
• Social Mobility and Gender Equality at Workplace

Cite this post

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, December 30). 76 Gender Equality Essay Topics. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/gender-equality-essay-topics/

"76 Gender Equality Essay Topics." StudyCorgi , 30 Dec. 2022, studycorgi.com/ideas/gender-equality-essay-topics/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) '76 Gender Equality Essay Topics'. 30 December.

1. StudyCorgi . "76 Gender Equality Essay Topics." December 30, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/gender-equality-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "76 Gender Equality Essay Topics." December 30, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/gender-equality-essay-topics/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "76 Gender Equality Essay Topics." December 30, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/ideas/gender-equality-essay-topics/.

These essay examples and topics on Gender Equality were carefully selected by the StudyCorgi editorial team. They meet our highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, and fact accuracy. Please ensure you properly reference the materials if you’re using them to write your assignment.

This essay topic collection was updated on December 27, 2023 .

• How It Works
• PhD thesis writing
• Master thesis writing
• Bachelor thesis writing
• Dissertation writing service
• Dissertation abstract writing
• Thesis proposal writing
• Thesis editing service
• Thesis proofreading service
• Thesis formatting service
• Coursework writing service
• Research paper writing service
• Architecture thesis writing
• Computer science thesis writing
• Engineering thesis writing
• History thesis writing
• MBA thesis writing
• Nursing dissertation writing
• Psychology dissertation writing
• Sociology thesis writing
• Statistics dissertation writing
• Buy dissertation online
• Write my dissertation
• Cheap thesis
• Cheap dissertation
• Custom dissertation
• Dissertation help
• Pay for thesis
• Pay for dissertation
• Senior thesis
• Write my thesis

100 Gender Research Topics For Academic Papers

Gender research topics are very popular across the world. Students in different academic disciplines are often asked to write papers and essays about these topics. Some of the disciplines that require learners to write about gender topics include:

Sociology Psychology Gender studies Business studies

When pursuing higher education in these disciplines, learners can choose what to write about from a wide range of gender issues topics. However, the wide range of issues that learners can research and write about when it comes to gender makes choosing what to write about difficult. Here is a list of the top 100 gender and sexuality topics that students can consider.

Controversial Gender Research Topics

Do you like the idea of writing about something controversial? If yes, this category has some of the best gender topics to write about. They touch on issues like gender stereotypes and issues that are generally associated with members of a specific gender. Here are some of the best controversial gender topics that you can write about.

• How human behavior is affected by gender misconceptions
• How are straight marriages influenced by gay marriages
• Explain the most common sex-role stereotypes
• What are the effects of workplace stereotypes?
• What issues affect modern feminism?
• How sexuality affects sex-role stereotyping
• How does the media break sex-role stereotypes
• Explain the dual approach to equality between women and men
• What are the most outdated sex-role stereotypes
• Are men better than women?
• How equal are men and women?
• How do politics and sexuality relate?
• How can films defy gender-based stereotypes
• What are the advantages of being a woman?
• What are the disadvantages of being a woman?
• What are the advantages of being a man?
• Discuss the disadvantages of being a woman
• Should governments legalize prostitution?
• Explain how sexual orientation came about?
• Women communicate better than men
• Women are the stronger sex
• Explain how the world can be made better for women
• Discuss the future gender norms
• How important are sex roles in society
• Discuss the transgender and feminism theory
• How does feminism help in the creation of alternative women’s culture?
• Gender stereotypes in education and science
• Discuss racial variations when it comes to gender-related attitudes
• Women are better leaders
• Men can’t survive without women

This category also has some of the best gender debate topics. However, learners should be keen to pick topics they are interested in. This will enable them to ensure that they enjoy the research and writing process.

Interesting Gender Inequality Topics

Gender-based inequality is witnessed almost every day. As such, most learners are conversant with gender inequality research paper topics. However, it’s crucial to pick topics that are devoid of discrimination of members of a specific gender. Here are examples of gender inequality essay topics.

• Sex discrimination aspects in schools
• How to identify inequality between sexes
• Sex discrimination causes
• The inferior role played by women in relationships
• Discuss sex differences in the education system
• How can gender discrimination be identified in sports?
• Can inequality issues between men and women be solved through education?
• Why are professional opportunities for women in sports limited?
• Why are there fewer women in leadership positions?
• Discuss gender inequality when it comes to work-family balance
• How does gender-based discrimination affect early childhood development?
• Can sex discrimination be reduced by technology?
• How can sex discrimination be identified in a marriage?
• Explain where sex discrimination originates from
• Discuss segregation and motherhood in labor markets
• Explain classroom sex discrimination
• How can inequality in American history be justified?
• Discuss different types of sex discrimination in modern society
• Discuss various factors that cause gender-based inequality
• Discuss inequality in human resource practices and processes
• Why is inequality between women and men so rampant in developing countries?
• How can governments bridge gender gaps between women and men?
• Work-home conflict is a sign of inequality between women and men
• Explain why women are less wealthy than men
• How can workplace gender-based inequality be addressed?

After choosing the gender inequality essay topics they like, students should research, brainstorm ideas, and come up with an outline before they start writing. This will ensure that their essays have engaging introductions and convincing bodies, as well as, strong conclusions.

Amazing Gender Roles Topics for Academic Papers and Essays

This category has ideas that slightly differ from gender equality topics. That’s because equality or lack of it can be measured by considering the representation of both genders in different roles. As such, some gender roles essay topics might not require tiresome and extensive research to write about. Nevertheless, learners should take time to gather the necessary information required to write about these topics. Here are some of the best gender topics for discussion when it comes to the roles played by men and women in society.

• Describe gender identity
• Describe how a women-dominated society would be
• Compare gender development theories
• How equally important are maternity and paternity levees for babies?
• How can gender-parity be achieved when it comes to parenting?
• Discuss the issues faced by modern feminism
• How do men differ from women emotionally?
• Discuss gender identity and sexual orientation
• Is investing in the education of girls beneficial?
• Explain the adoption of gender-role stereotyped behaviors
• Discuss games and toys for boys and girls
• Describe patriarchal attitudes in families
• Explain patriarchal stereotypes in family relationships
• What roles do women and men play in politics?
• Discuss sex equity and academic careers
• Compare military career opportunities for both genders
• Discuss the perception of women in the military
• Describe feminine traits
• Discus gender-related issues faced by women in gaming
• Men should play major roles in the welfare of their children
• Explain how the aging population affects the economic welfare of women?
• What has historically determined modern differences in gender roles?
• Does society need stereotyped gender roles?
• Does nature have a role to play in stereotyped gender roles?
• The development and adoption of gender roles

The list of gender essay topics that are based on the roles of each sex can be quite extensive. Nevertheless, students should be keen to pick interesting gender topics in this category.

Important Gender Issues Topics for Research Paper

If you want to write a paper or essay on an important gender issue, this category has the best ideas for you. Students can write about different issues that affect individuals of different genders. For instance, this category can include gender wage gap essay topics. Wage variation is a common issue that affects women in different countries. Some of the best gender research paper topics in this category include:

• Discuss gender mainstreaming purpose
• Discuss the issue of gender-based violence
• Why is the wage gap so common in most countries?
• How can society promote equality in opportunities for women and men in sports?
• Explain what it means to be transgender
• Discuss the best practices of gender-neutral management
• What is women’s empowerment?
• Discuss how human trafficking affects women
• How problematic is gender-blindness for women?
• What does the glass ceiling mean in management?
• Why are women at a higher risk of sexual exploitation and violence?
• Why is STEM uptake low among women?
• How does ideology affect the determination of relations between genders
• How are sporting women fighting for equality?
• Discuss sports, women, and media institutions
• How can cities be made safer for girls and women?
• Discuss international trends in the empowerment of women
• How do women contribute to the world economy?
• Explain how feminism on different social relations unites men and women as groups
• Explain how gender diversity influence scientific discovery and innovation

This category has some of the most interesting women’s and gender studies paper topics. However, most of them require extensive research to come up with hard facts and figures that will make academic papers or essays more interesting.

Students in high schools and colleges can pick what to write about from a wide range of gender studies research topics. However, some gender studies topics might not be ideal for some learners based on the given essay prompt. Therefore, make sure that you have understood what the educator wants you to write about before you pick a topic. Our experts can help you choose a good thesis topic . Choosing the right gender studies topics enables learners to answer the asked questions properly. This impresses educators to award them top grades.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment * Error message

Name * Error message

Email * Error message

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

As Putin continues killing civilians, bombing kindergartens, and threatening WWIII, Ukraine fights for the world's peaceful future.

Ukraine Live Updates

Thesis Helpers

Find the best tips and advice to improve your writing. Or, have a top expert write your paper.

131 Gender Research Topics To Attain Top Grades

Are you looking for a gender topic to use for your research project, research proposal, thesis, or dissertation? You are definitely at the right place. We have 131 diverse gender research topics that will lead you to a point of research to get to the bottom of a certain phenomenon.

As students in college, you need to provide high-quality assignment output to increase the possibility of getting top grades.

These topics can help you dive more into research and even provide a bridge for your career. While doing research you might meet different stakeholders that can help you get a better understanding. You can also get thesis help from us online.

What Is Gender?

Gender is portrayed by the socially constructed characteristics found in males and females. Gender defines the behaviors, norms, and gender roles of males and females. However, it differs in certain societies. However, gender can lead to specific social and economic inequalities in society.

The other popularly confusing phenomenon is sex which refers to the unique biological and psychological characteristics of males, females, and intersex persons. Hugely, gender influences people’s experiences and access to different social amenities.

If gender issues interest you, you can consider doing gender development and gender studies courses or units in college. You will get a better understanding of the relationships between one’s gender and society.

The Different Parts Of A Thesis

A thesis has three major parts which include the introduction, body, and last part.

• Introductory Part The thesis introductory party should entail the cover page, description page, table of contents, list of figures, and list of tables. This may differ based on the kind of thesis that you are doing.
• Body The body content can vary based on the topic of gender that you are doing. If you are doing a research report topic; it should contain the introduction of the topic, theoretical basis, project implementation, research results, and discussion. If you are doing a development project report the body should contain the introduction, objectives, project background, theoretical basis, project implementation, and discussion.
• The last part This part should contain a list of references and appendices.

Gender Research Topics

Are you searching for ideal topics on gender? You can consider using any of these for your research paper, project, or assignment. You can’t miss an ideal one to use for your paper:

• General impacts of globalization on experiences around gender.
• Dynamics found in gender development.
• Effects of discrimination based on gender at jobs and careers.
• Promotion of gender equality in the world in the 21 st
• The known social construction of gender roles.
• Discuss whether gender is natural or acquired from the surrounding.
• Is gender a role, biological sex, or culturally acquired?
• How does gender impact social media interactions?
• Evaluate the changing gender roles in families.
• How are gender roles portrayed in cartoons?
• Effects of gender biases in the workplace.

Topics About Gender

Do different topics about gender interest you? Then consider any of these for your research project, research paper, proposal, and much more:

• The best modes to use to teach students about gender equality.
• Evaluate women’s empowerment in society.
• Common challenges faced by women in the workplace.
• Classification of gender dysphoria.
• Evaluate sex, gender, and inequalities
• Evaluate gender stereotypes and misunderstandings.
• Importance of mass media in solving gender issues.
• How does society portray gender and sexuality?
• Influence of gender stereotypes in individuals.

Gender Topics

Equality should be achieved in schools, workplaces, and social places. We are social beings and need to find a way to boost equality in society to prevent anyone from feeling left out:

• Gender disparity in science.
• Evolution of discrimination in society in the previous centuries.
• Similarities between racism and gender inequality.
• Social roles men and women.
• Gender roles in the current society.
• Why is discrimination dominant in certain places?
• How has LGBT evolved?
• The rights of single mothers in society?
• Gender role definition.
• The advantages of feminism in the growth of society.

Gender-Related Topics

Here are any gender-related topics which you can use for your thesis, dissertation, proposal, or project. If you have an interest in the field, what are you waiting for?

• The relation between culture and body self-image.
• Forms of gender violence in society.
• Gender role in medicine and science.
• Role of women in the progress of the world economy.
• The possibility of reaching gender equality in modern society.
• The kind of stereotypical depictions of women in the media.
• Role of women on Earth.
• How does religion diminish male roles in society?
• Division of labor for different genders in the workplace.
• Does gender influence income inequality?

Gender Studies Research Topics

Gender studies courses and the unit have gained popularity in different universities. The world is growing with each passing day, and it is important to understand how different genders interact in different institutions:

• The reality of the gender pay gap in the current society.
• Relation between culture and gender stereotypes.
• The root of gender stereotypes.
• Gender stereotypes are found on TV.
• How does gender inequality affect kids’ upbringing?
• Gender barriers faced by women in educational establishments.
• Causes of gender-based violence in the world.
• Family issues are caused by the gender disparity globally.
• The attitudes towards gays and lesbians.
• The Importance of maternal and paternal leaves for the newborn baby.

Gender Inequality Research Paper Topics

The world should provide a safe space for everyone. Therefore, you can use these gender inequality research paper topics to dig deeper into the kind of inequalities people go through:

• Gender concepts integrated into Artificial Intelligence.
• Gender diversity roles in scientific discovery.
• Major causes of gender imbalance.
• Relation between sports, women, and media institutions.
• The advantages and disadvantages of being a feminist.
• Importance of parents’ investment in girls’ education.
• Factors that cause inequality in the workplace.
• How gender misconceptions affect behavior.
• Steps that can be taken by parents to achieve gender parity.

Sociology Research Topics On Gender

Sociology entails the study of social interactions. If that interests you then these sociology research topics on gender will do the trick:

• The genderized occupations in society.
• Gender stereotypes in different regions.
• How are men and women treated differently in law?
• The known gender roles in the family.
• Women’s rights history in different countries.
• Advantages and disadvantages of gender identification in society.
• Mental perception of gender in society.
• Legalization of LGBT in families.
• How does gender studies impact self-esteem?
• The origin and dangers of feminism.

Gender Topics For Research

Gender equality, and achievement will play a huge role in improving productivity in the workplace, school, and social places. Advocating for gender equality for both men and women is crucial:

• Why are girls more likely to fall victim to sexual exploitation?
• Key obstacles that prevent girls from accessing quality education.
• Methods that can be used to promote equal opportunities for women and men in society.
• Impact of gender diversity in scientific innovations.
• Common gender-neutral management practices.
• The contrast of the wage gap between both genders.
• Evaluate gender roles in society.
• Can men fight for their rights as feminists do?
• Evaluate gender discrimination and promotion over time.
• Can education help solve inequality issues?

Gender Issues Topics For Research Paper

What resources do you use for research? You can search on the internet, and use scholarly articles, documentaries, books, and PDFs to get the information that you need:

• Evaluate work-home conflict as a result of gender inequality.
• Factors influencing inequality in developing countries.
• Best way to address gender-based issues at the workplace.
• Relation between gender and leadership in education.
• Bullying issues in education based on gender.
• A social perspective on gender issues and sexuality.
• Best modes of addressing gender equality.
• Relation between globalization, liberalization, and gender equality.
• Major gender issues in international relations.
• How does gender influence the recruitment of individuals in the workplace?

Best Gender Research Paper Topics

Which gender issues have you encountered in society? These are some other topics that can bring you into the limelight. Attaining gender equality in society is important:

• Scarcity of water and effect on gender inequality.
• Unequal division of economic growth in society.
• Factors that lead to gender inequality in the workplace.
• Gender inequality in retirement and employment.
• Relation between poverty and gender.
• Gender inequalities that lead to women’s rights movements.
• Gender stereotypes issue and contribute to gender inequality.
• Effects of gender inequality in economic development.
• Dire consequences of gender inequality.
• The importance of women fighting for gender equality.

Gender Research Paper Topics

You can use any of these gender research paper topics to make your proposal, project, thesis, or dissertation, which will help to make your paper really good. But if this whole writing process is difficult for you, you can find dissertation writers for hire .

• Manifestation of gender inequality in society.
• From your perspective is it possible to fully achieve gender equality?
• Future outcomes of the present gender inequality.
• How does gender blindness impact gender inequality?
• Economic aftermaths of gender inequality.
• Relation between gender equality and politics.
• Evaluate gender inequality from a psychological perspective.
• Best modes to tackle gender inequality at home.
• How is gender inequality portrayed in sports?
• Should women and men perform specific roles?

Women And Gender Studies Research Topics

When it comes to gender issues, women are the most affected. Therefore, there is a need to balance the issue so that both men and women can share the same rights:

• Women’s views on long-existing gender stereotypes.
• How are gender roles portrayed in movies, news, and TV shows?
• Gender stereotypes in children
• Evaluate gender as portrayed in literature
• Gender mainstreaming in institutions.
• Gender role effects on childhood development.
• How are gender stereotypes developed in families?
• Parents’ gender roles and children’s aspirations.
• Emotional perception of gender inequality.
• The disparity between gender stereotypes in the Eastern and Western culture

Research Topics On Gender Inequality

If you are planning to do a research paper on gender. These are the perfect topics to start with. You can find data for different topics easily on the internet:

• Gender stereotypes in athletic management.
• Effect of globalization on gender norms and experiences.
• Feminization and gender issues in education
• Relation between gender equality and women’s rights.
• The global perception of female leadership and gender equity.
• The effects of gender discrimination in social media and how it affects individuals.
• Transgender and gender non-conforming in children.
• Race and Gender public relations.
• Gender socialization and ageism.
• Gender differences in financial knowledge acquisition.

Get The Best Thesis Paper Help

Do you need professional thesis paper help? The company Name is here for you. Not only will you get thesis writing help but also editing help. We have the best-rated expert writers that work toward doing the best research at an affordable price.

Our packages are cheap to ensure you don’t feel too much pressure as a student. Just consult us online and get help on the various gender roles topics. Your grades will shoot up, and the professor will be pleased with your work. So, what are you waiting for?

Make PhD experience your own

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *