Background. Women represent an increasing proportion of the overall workforce in medicine but are underrepresented in leadership roles.Methods. To explore gender inequalities and challenges in... Show moreBackground. Women represent an increasing proportion of the overall workforce in medicine but are underrepresented in leadership roles.Methods. To explore gender inequalities and challenges in career opportunities, a web-based survey was conducted among the membership of the European Association of Neuro-Oncology and the Brain Tumor Group of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer.Results. A total of 228 colleagues responded to the survey: 129 women (median age 45 years; range, 25-66 years)and 99 men (median age 48 years; range, 24-81 years); 153 participants (67%) were married and 157 participants(69%) had at least 1 child. Women less often declared being married (60% vs 77%, P =.007) or having a child (63%vs 77%, P =.024). Men more frequently had a full-time position (88% vs 75%, P =.036). Women and men both perceived an underrepresentation of women in leadership positions. Half of participants agreed that the most important challenges for women are leading a team and obtaining a faculty position. Fewer women than men would accept such a position (42% vs 56%). The main reasons were limited time for career and an inappropriate work and life balance. Women specifically cited negative discrimination, limited opportunities, and lack of self-confidence.Discrimination of women at work was perceived by 64% of women vs 47% of men (P =.003).Conclusion. Women are perceived as experiencing more difficulties in acquiring a leadership position. Personal preferences may account for an underrepresentation of women in leadership positions, but perceived gender inequalities extend beyond disparities of access to leadership. Show less
Oostindie, G.J.; Ferdinand, M.; Veenendaal, W.P. 2020
For a great majority of former colonies, the outcome of decolonization was independence. Yet scattered across the globe, remnants of former colonial empires are still non-sovereign as part of... Show moreFor a great majority of former colonies, the outcome of decolonization was independence. Yet scattered across the globe, remnants of former colonial empires are still non-sovereign as part of larger metropolitan states. There is little drive for independence in these territories, virtually all of which are small island nations, also known as sub-national island jurisdictions (SNIJs). Why do so many former colonial territories choose to remain non-sovereign? In this paper we attempt to answer this question by conducting a global comparative study of non-sovereign jurisdictions. We start off by analyzing their present economic, social and political conditions, after which we assess local levels of (dis)content with the contemporary political status, and their articulation in postcolonial politics. We find that levels of discontent and frustration covary with the particular demographic, socio-economic and historical-cultural conditions of individual territories. While significant independence movements can be observed in only two or three jurisdictions, in virtually all cases there is profound dissatisfaction and frustration with the contemporary non-sovereign arrangement and its outcomes. Instead of achieving independence, the territories’ real struggle nowadays is for obtaining ‘true equality’ with the metropolis, as well as recognition of their distinct cultural identities.Keywords: decolonization, equality, independence, islands, non-sovereign, sub-national island jurisdictions Show less
Much controversy surrounds questions about whether humans have an aversion to inequity and how a commitment to equality might play a role in cooperation and other aspects of social interactions.... Show moreMuch controversy surrounds questions about whether humans have an aversion to inequity and how a commitment to equality might play a role in cooperation and other aspects of social interactions. Examining the social decisions of children with autism spectrum disorders provides a fascinating opportunity to explore these issues. Specifically, we evaluated the possibility that children with autism spectrum disorders may be less likely than typically developing children to show a prioritisation of equality. A total of 69 typically developing (mean age 11;6 years) and 57 cognitively able children with autism spectrum disorders (mean age 11;7 years) played a social decision game in which the equality option was pitted against alternatives that varied in instrumental outcomes. Results showed that both groups were more likely to choose the equality option when there was no cost to the self. However, even though children with autism spectrum disorders appeared to view equality as preferable to causing explicit harm to others, they departed from an equality stance when there was an opportunity to increase instrumental gain without any obvious harm to the self or the other. Typically developing children, in contrast, showed similar prioritisation of equality across these contexts. Future research needs to address the question of how differences in the commitment to equality affect children’s social behaviour and relationships in daily life. Show less
