Neglected Aspects and Unsupported Claims

ASU Author/Contributor (non-ASU co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
Rose Mary Webb Ph.D., Associate Professor and Experimental Psychology Concentration Director (Creator)
Appalachian State University (ASU )
Web Site:

Abstract: Comments on the article by M. E. Kite et al (see record 2001-10045-002), which summarized the findings and recommendations of the Task Force on the Status of Women in Academe. The present authors contend that while Kite et al documented the differences in the activities of men and women in academia, it is not clear that "inequalities persist." Kite et al interpreted the observed differences in outcomes between men and women as self-evident indicators of remaining bias and discrimination. The present authors warn of two problems with this interpretation. First, Kite et al neglected important variables that suggest alternative interpretations of these differences. Second, the authors made unsupported claims about the existence of bias and discrimination against women. Here the present authors document specific cases of these errors in reasoning. In conclusion, observed differences between men and women might be partly a reflection of other (neglected) personological variables on which the sexes overlap considerably but differ on average. Just as differential outcomes do not imply differential opportunities, equal opportunities do not necessarily produce equal outcomes.

Additional Information

Bleske-Rechek, A., & Webb, R.M. (2002). Neglected aspects and unsupported claims [Comment]. American Psychologist, 57(12): 1132-1133 (Dec 2002). Published by the American Psychological Association (ISSN: 1935-990X). This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.57.12.1132
Language: English
Date: 2002

Email this document to