BACKGROUND: Gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment are common in medical practice and may be even more prevalent in academic medicine. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment among medical school faculty and the associations of gender-based discrimination with number of publications, career satisfaction, and perceptions of career advancement. DESIGN: A self-administered mailed questionnaire of U.S. medical school faculty that covered a broad range of topics relating to academic life. SETTING: 24 randomly selected medical schools in the contiguous United States. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 3332 full-time faculty, stratified by specialty, graduation cohort, and sex. MEASUREMENTS: Prevalence of self-reported experiences of discrimination and harassment, number of peer-reviewed publications, career satisfaction, and perception of career advancement. RESULTS: Female faculty were more than 2.5 times more likely than male faculty to perceive gender-based discrimination in the academic environment (P < 0.001). Among women, rates of reported discrimination ranged from 47% for the youngest faculty to 70% for the oldest faculty. Women who reported experiencing negative gender bias had similar productivity but lower career satisfaction scores than did other women (P< 0.001). About half of female faculty but few male faculty experienced some form of sexual harassment. These experiences were similarly prevalent across the institutions in the sample and in all regions of the United States. Female faculty who reported being sexually harassed perceived gender-specific bias in the academic environment more often than did other women (80% compared with 61 %) and more often reported experiencing gender bias in professional advancement (72% compared with 47%). Publications, career satisfaction, and professional confidence were not affected by sexual harassment, and self-assessed career advancement was only marginally lower for female faculty who had experienced sexual harassment (P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Despite substantial increases in the number of female faculty, reports of gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment remain common.

BACKGROUND: Studies have found that female faculty publish less, have slower career progress, and generally have a more difficult time in academic careers than male faculty. The relation of family (dependent) responsibilities to gender and academic productivity is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To describe dependent responsibilities by gender and to identify their relation to the aspirations, goals, rate of progress, academic productivity, and career satisfaction of male and female medical school faculty. DESIGN: 177-item survey questionnaire. SETTING: 24 randomly selected medical schools in the contiguous United States. PARTICIPANTS: 1979 respondents from a probability sample of full-time academic medical school faculty. MEASUREMENTS: The main end point for measuring academic productivity was the total number of publications in refereed journals. Perceived career progress and career satisfaction were assessed by using Likert scales. RESULTS: For both male and female faculty, more than 90% of time devoted to family responsibilities was spent on child care. Among faculty with children, women had greater obstacles to academic careers and less institutional support, including research funding from their institutions (46% compared with 57%; P < 0.001) and secretarial support (0.68 full-time equivalents compared with 0.83 full-time equivalents; P = 0.003), than men. Compared with men with children, women with children had fewer publications (18.3 compared with 29.3; P < 0.001), slower self-perceived career progress (2.6 compared with 3.1; P < 0.001), and lower career satisfaction (5.9 compared with 6.6; P < 0.001). However, no significant differences between the sexes were seen for faculty without children. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with female faculty without children and compared with men, female faculty with children face major obstacles in academic careers. Some of these obstacles can be easily modified (for example, by eliminating after-hours meetings and creating part-time career tracks). Medical schools should address these obstacles and provide support for faculty with children.

PURPOSE: To determine (1) the prevalence of mentoring relationships for U.S. medical school junior faculty; (2) the quality of these mentoring relationships; (3) any variation by gender or race; and (4) the relationship between mentoring and junior faculty members' perceptions of institutional professional support; research-, teaching-, and clinical-skills development; allocation of time to professional activities; and career satisfaction. METHOD: In 1995 a 177-item survey was mailed to 3,013 full-time faculty at 24 randomly selected U.S. medical schools stratified on an area of medical specialization, graduation cohort, and gender. Mentoring was defined as "dynamic reciprocal relationship between an advanced career incumbent (the mentor) and a junior faculty member (the protege) aimed at fostering the development of the junior person/protege." Because mentoring is most crucial for junior faculty, the study focused on mentoring relationships within the previous three years ("recent mentoring") for faculty who were not full professors. Chisquare tests, analysis of variance, and principal-components analysis were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: In all, 1,808 (60%) of the 3,013 faculty surveyed, of whom 72% were junior faculty, returned completed questionaires. Fifty-four percent of the junior faculty had had a recent mentoring relationship. There was no significant difference between the men and the women faculty or between majority and minority faculty in the prevalence and quality of the mentoring relationships. The faculty with mentors rated their research preparation and research skills higher than did the faculty without mentors. Most of the women faculty (80%) and the minority faculty (86%) who had had mentors reported that it was not important to have a mentor of the same gender or minority group. CONCLUSION: Mentoring relationships are prevalent in academic medicine and should be promoted to support the career growth of junior faculty.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationships between both internal and external career-motivating factors and academic productivity (as measured by the total numbers of publications) among full-time medical faculty, and whether these relationships differ for men and women. METHOD: In 1995 a 177-item survey was mailed to 3,013 full-time faculty at 24 randomly selected U.S. medical schools stratified on area of medical specialization, length of service, and gender. Two-tailed t-tests and regression analyses were used to study the data. RESULTS: A total of 1,764 faculty were used in the final analyses. The women had published two thirds as many articles as had the men (mean, 24.2 vs. 37.8). Intrinsic and extrinsic career motivation were rated similarly (on a three-point scale) by the women and the men: intrinsic career motivation was rated higher (women's mean rating: 2.8, men's mean rating: 2.9) than was extrinsic career motivation (mean rating: 2.1 for both). The main findings of the regression analyses were (1) intrinsic career motivation was positively associated, and extrinsic career motivation was negatively associated, with the number of publications; (2) publication rates were higher for the men than for the women after controlling for career motivation; and (3) there was no significant effect of gender on these relationships. CONCLUSION: The women faculty published less than did their men colleagues, but this difference cannot be accounted for by gender differences in career motivation. Further research on institutional support, family obligations, harassment, and other factors that could affect academic productivity is necessary to understand the gender difference in numbers of publications.