Affinity bias in the undergraduate recruitment process: The role of gender, sex and sexuality in the decision-making process up the seniority ladder

Women from minority ethnicities are less likely to get the biggest grants than their peers, because of an additional systemic bias, says Ijeoma Uchegbu of University College London.

Progression up the seniority ladder relies on opaque factors, such as social networks, and being vouched for by other academics, as well as access to information on grants and how to win them. Multiple studies have found that, whether consciously or not, senior figures are more likely to see potential in — and guide — people who are similar to themselves, an effect sometimes termed affinity bias.

Richards compares it to navigating from one side of a dark, cluttered room to the other — some are given a torch and others are not. People help others by shining a torch. He says that if you aren’t being helped out as much as others, it will make a difference in progression.

Studies show that women and marginalized academics get lower marks when they are rated by the students. Mitchell notes that time spent on work related to breaking down barriers also takes away research time. Another major reason is disparities in the grants process.

Most people at the professor level are white and male. HESA data show 70 Black professors in science subjects in the United Kingdom (0.6% of the total), of whom just 10 are women (HESA provides both figures rounded to the nearest 5; it also allows respondents to identify as ‘other’, not male or female).