To explore factors associated with occupational sex segregation in the United States over the past four decades, we analyzed U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for the percent of women employed in 60 varied occupations from 1972 to 2010. Occupations were assessed on status, people-things orientation, and data-ideas orientation. Multilevel linear modeling (MLM) analyses showed that women increasingly entered high-status occupations from 1972 to 2010, but women's participation in things-oriented occupations (e.g., STEM fields and mechanical and construction trades) remained low and relatively stable. Occupations' data-ideas orientation was not consistently related to sex segregation. Because of women's increased participation in high-status occupations, occupational status became an increasingly weak predictor of women's participation rates in occupations, whereas occupations' people-things orientation became an increasingly strong predictor over time. These findings are discussed in relation to theories of occupational sex segregation and social policies to reduce occupational sex segregation.
References
[1]
Anker R (1998) Gender and Jobs: Sex Segregation of Occupations in the World (International Labour Office, Geneva).
[2]
Browne J (2006) Sex Segregation and Inequality in the Modern Labour Market (The Policy Press, Bristol, UK).
[3]
Charle M, Grusky DB (2004) Occupational Ghettos: The Worldwide Segregation of Women and Men (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).
[4]
Watt HMG, Eccles JS eds (2008) Gender and Occupational Outcomes: Longitudinal Assessments of Individual, Social, and Cultural Influences (American Psychological Association,Washington, DC).
[5]
Hegewisch A, Liepmann H, Hayes J, Hartmann H (2010) Separate and not equal? Gender segregation in the labor market and the gender wage gap. Institute for Women's Policy Research Briefing Paper. IWPR C377. (Institute for Women's Policy Research, Washington, DC). Retrieved from Institute for Women's Policy Research website: http://www.iwpr.org.
[6]
Jacobs J (2003) Detours on the road to equality: Women, work and higher education. Contexts 2(1): 32–41. doi: 10.1525/ctx.2003.2.1.32
[7]
Ceci SJ, Williams WM eds (2007) Why Aren't More Women in Science: Top Researchers Debate the Evidence. (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC)
[8]
Kaufman RL (2010) Race, Gender, and the Labor Market: Inequalities at Work (Lynne Rienner Publishers, London).
[9]
Ceci SJ, Williams WM eds (2010) The Mathematics of Sex: How Biology and Society Conspire to Limit Talented Women and Girls (Oxford University Press, New York)
[10]
Ferriman K, Lubinski D, Benbow CP (2009) Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and sex differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. J Pers Soc Psychol 97(3): 517–532. doi: 10.1037/a0016030
[11]
Blackburn RM, Brooks B, Jarman J (2001) Occupational stratification: The vertical dimension of occupational segregation. Work Employ Soc 15(3): 511–538. doi: 10.1177/09500170122119138
[12]
Melkas H, Anker R (2001) Occupational segregation by sex in Nordic countries: An empirical investigation. In Women, gender and work: What is equality and how do we get there?.ed Loutfi MF (International Labour Office, Geneva), pp 341–363.
[13]
Rosenfeld R, Kalleberg AL (1991) Gender inequality in the labor market: A cross-national perspective. Acta Sociol 34(3): 207–225. doi: 10.1177/000169939103400304
[14]
Lippa RA (1998) Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. J Pers Soc Psychol 74(4): 996–1009. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.74.4.996
[15]
Lubinski D (2000) Scientific and social significance of assessing individual differences: “Sinking shafts at a few critical points.”. Annu Rev Psychol 51: 405–444. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.405
[16]
Prediger DJ (1982) Dimensions underlying Holland's hexagon: Missing link between interests and occupations? J Voc Behav 21(3): 259–287. doi: 10.1016/0001-8791(82)90036-7
[17]
Tracey TJG, Rounds J (1996) The spherical representation of vocational interests. J Voc Behav 48(1): 3–41. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.0002
[18]
Su R, Rounds J, Armstrong PI (2009) Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychol Bull 135(6): 859–884. doi: 10.1037/a0017364
[19]
Queneau H (2006) Is the long-term reduction in occupational sex segregation still continuing in the United States? Soc Sci J 43(4): 681–688. doi: 10.1016/j.soscij.2006.08.019
[20]
Tomaskovic-Devey D, Zimmer C, Stainback K, Robinson C, Taylor T, et al. (2006) Documenting desegregation: Segregation in American workplaces by race, ethnicity, and sex, 1966–2003. Am Soc Rev 71(4): 565–588. doi: 10.1177/000312240607100403
[21]
Holland JL (1997) Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments 3rd ed. (Psychological Assessment Resources Odessa, FL)
[22]
Rounds J, Smith T, Hubert L, Lewis P, Rivkin D (1999) Development of Occupational Interest Profiles for O*NET. (National Center for O*NET Development Employment Security Commission, Raleigh, NC).
[23]
SAS Institute Inc. (2008) SAS/STAT 9.2 User's Guide. (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).
[24]
Singer JD (1998) Using SAS PROC MIXED to fit multilevel models, hierarchical models, and individual growth models. J Educ Behav Stat 23(4): 323–355. doi: 10.3102/10769986023004323
