Unconscious Bias and Its Role in Discrimination in the Workplace

RRLs

Ross, H. (2008). Exploring unconscious bias. Diversity best Practices.

https://www.getyourbigon.com/docs/UnconsciousBias.pdf

Ross, H. (2008) discusses the phenomenon of unconscious bias, highlighting its pervasive impact on various aspects
of society, particularly in the realms of corporate leadership, military positions, and even presidential elections. The
author presents a striking observation: a disproportionate number of CEOs, military leaders, and presidents are taller
than the average population, indicating an unconscious bias towards height. This bias extends to salary differentials,
with an inch of height equating to approximately $789 more per year.

The author argues that such biases, whether based on height, weight, race, clothing, or gender, lead to unfair and
absurd decisions, affecting performance evaluations, medical procedures, and educational opportunities. Despite the
belief in a dichotomy of "good person/bad person" regarding bias, the author challenges this paradigm, suggesting
that virtually every individual harbors some form of bias. The conventional approach to diversity efforts, focusing on
identifying and fixing "bad people," is criticized as self-serving and arrogant.

Unconscious bias, or hidden bias, has gained prominence in diversity advocacy, especially as societal dynamics
evolve in the 21st century. The author emphasizes that unconscious beliefs underlie a significant portion of human
behavior related to diversity, as demonstrated by research from esteemed institutions.

The paper delves into the purpose of bias, positing that it serves as an automatic "danger detector" for survival,
allowing individuals to make quick decisions about safety and value. The unconscious, as described by Freud, is
compared to an iceberg, with recent research suggesting its far-reaching impact on decision-making. The human
brain's limited capacity to process information leads to the development of perceptual lenses that filter and
interpret stimuli based on pre-existing biases.

To address unconscious bias, the author outlines seven steps, including recognizing, identifying, dissecting, and
eliminating biases. The deep impact of unconscious bias in the workplace is underscored, affecting hiring decisions,
performance reviews, and leadership appointments. The author contends that understanding and addressing
unconscious bias is crucial for creating a more equitable and just society, challenging individuals to acknowledge and
confront their biases for meaningful change.

Lattal, A. (2016). The Hidden World of Unconscious Bias and its Impact on the" Neutral" Workplace
Investigator. Journal of Law and Policy, 24(2), 3. https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol24/iss2/3/

In Lattal's study from 2016, the focus is on workplace investigations, specifically those related to harassment,
discrimination, and other misconduct allegations. Workplace investigations have become crucial for employers to
demonstrate compliance with the obligation to maintain a discrimination-free workplace. The study highlights that
the fairness and effectiveness of workplace investigations have increasingly faced judicial scrutiny. The foundation of
these investigations relies on the assumption that workplace investigators can be impartial in determining facts,
making impartiality a key aspect of a fair and effective investigation.

The study points out a challenge to achieving true impartiality: automatic cognitive biases that unconsciously
influence biased behavior. It emphasizes that these unconscious biases are likely to impact the role of workplace
investigators. Despite the lack of specific regulations for workplace investigators, the study suggests that they must
educate themselves about the potential detrimental effects of biases at each stage of the investigation process. It
emphasizes the need for investigators to make conscious and consistent efforts to reduce the impact of unconscious
biases.

The article acknowledges the difficulty of overcoming unconscious biases but suggests that workplace investigators
can employ bias reduction strategies to mitigate the risk of biases influencing their conclusions. It delves into the
workplace investigation process, emphasizing the critical role of neutrality in investigations. The study then explores
emerging research in the science of unconscious bias, providing insights into the mechanisms of bias. Additionally, it
discusses court cases where bias may have affected the processes and outcomes of workplace investigations, adding
a practical dimension to the theoretical understanding of bias in the workplace.

In conclusion, the study proposes possible solutions to address the issue of unconscious biases in workplace
investigations. By highlighting the challenges posed by automatic cognitive biases and their potential impact on the
investigative process, the study aims to contribute to the ongoing discussion on improving the fairness and
effectiveness of workplace investigations.

Guillaume, Y. R., Dawson, J. F., Otaye‐Ebede, L., Woods, S. A., & West, M. A. (2017). Harnessing demographic
differences in organizations: What moderates the effects of workplace diversity?. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 38(2), 276-303. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/job.2040

Guillaume et al. (2017) investigate the moderating effects of workplace diversity by employing the Categorization-
Elaboration Model (CEM). The CEM is recognized as a comprehensive model supported by empirical evidence,
distinguishing it from other approaches. It encompasses work group diversity effects, relational demography effects,
and organizational diversity effects. Diversity, defined as differences between individuals on attributes leading to
perceived differences, influences outcomes through intergroup bias and information-elaboration processes.
Intergroup bias involves favorable responses toward the in-group, while information-elaboration enhances
performance through information exchange and integration.

The CEM posits that diversity's impact depends on three contingency factors: salience of demographic differences,
intergroup bias engendering factors, and factors affecting information-elaboration. Social category salience, linked to
comparative fit, normative fit, and cognitive accessibility, influences categorization. Intergroup bias is driven by
perceived threats to a positive self-image, undermining social integration, performance, and well-being. Information-
elaboration, a process of exchanging and integrating information, is expected to enhance performance, particularly
in tasks with strong information-processing or decision-making components.

The study suggests that the CEM's contingencies apply to workplace diversity at individual, group, and organizational
levels. The focus is on how strategy, unit design, leadership, HR practices, climate, culture, and individual differences
moderate workplace diversity effects on social integration, performance, and employee well-being.

The first moderating factor explored is strategy, which includes growth-oriented, stability-oriented, and customer-
oriented strategies. The CEM predicts that organizations operating in growth-oriented and customer-oriented
strategic environments will benefit from diverse employee populations, promoting innovation and understanding
customer needs. The study explores how strategy may moderate the effects of organizational diversity, work group
diversity, and relational demography. While results for work group diversity are inconclusive, organizational
diversity's positive impact on performance is supported in growth-oriented and customer-oriented strategic
environments. The study also suggests that organizational diversity may benefit organizations with a
demographically diverse customer base.

In summary, the findings indicate that growth-oriented and diversity management strategies positively moderate the
effects of organizational diversity on performance. Downsizing strategies may undermine performance due to
increased threat perception and intergroup bias. Environmental variables, such as change, instability, uncertainty,
and complexity, produced mixed results, possibly requiring growth-oriented or diversity management strategies to
unlock the positive effects of workplace diversity. Inconsistent findings for customer demographic diversity may be
attributed to a higher-order interaction effect with customer-oriented strategies. The study underscores the
importance of considering strategy as a moderating factor in understanding workplace diversity effects at different
organizational levels.

Hope Pelled, L., Ledford, Jr, G. E., & Albers Mohrman, S. (1999). Demographic dissimilarity and workplace
inclusion. Journal of Management studies, 36(7), 1013-1031. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-
6486.00168

Hope Pelled et al. (1999) conducted a study to investigate the relationship between individual demographic
dissimilarity from co-workers and three indicators of inclusion within an organization: decision-making influence,
access to sensitive information, and job security. The study involved data from 345 individuals in eight work units,
revealing significant findings regarding various demographic factors.
The study identified that individual dissimilarity in race and gender was negatively associated with inclusion,
indicating that those who were visibly different in terms of race or gender experienced lower levels of inclusion.
Interestingly, the negative effect of race dissimilarity was more pronounced for whites compared to non-whites. This
suggests that the impact of racial dissimilarity on inclusion is more significant for members of the majority group.

In contrast, individual dissimilarity in tenure and education level showed a positive association with inclusion.
Specifically, those with greater tenure and higher education levels experienced higher levels of inclusion within the
organization. The study indicates that when demographic differences are related to job expertise and are not visibly
apparent, they may contribute positively to organizational inclusion.

The overall results suggest that the impact of being different on organizational inclusion depends on the visibility of
the difference and its correlation with job expertise. Visible differences, such as race and gender, were associated
with lower inclusion, while differences related to job expertise, such as tenure and education level, were associated
with higher inclusion. Additionally, the study highlights that the negative effects of being different may be
particularly challenging for individuals who have traditionally constituted the majority in organizations.

Heilman, M. E., & Caleo, S. (2018). Gender discrimination in the workplace. The Oxford handbook of workplace
discrimination, 73-88. https://books.google.com.ph/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=wgJCDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT136&dq=Discrimination+in+the+Workplace&ots=eB9Kkp-
1gF&sig=NURMUJSYro_c6nDHeeCP26-vLrY&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Discrimination%20in%20the
%20Workplace&f=false

Heilman et al. (2018) explored the persistent issue of gender discrimination in the workplace, despite the increased
representation of women in the workforce and managerial positions. Despite comprising approximately half of the
workforce and managerial roles, women still face underrepresentation in high-status, prestigious, and well-
remunerated organizational positions. The study pointed out that within the Fortune 500, women occupy only 5% of
CEO positions, 14.6% of executive positions, and 16.9% of board member roles. The gender pay gap also persists,
with women earning a fraction of what their male counterparts make, and this gap has stagnated in recent years.

The study emphasized that these disparities continue even when men and women have comparable qualifications,
experience, and education. Efforts by organizations to promote women's career development have not been
sufficient in eliminating these gender-based inequalities. The chapter delved into the processes contributing to
gender discrimination and highlighted the role of gender stereotypes in perpetuating these inequities in the
workplace.

Gender discrimination was defined as the unfavorable treatment of applicants or employees based on their sex. The
manifestations of gender discrimination were explored across various stages of employment, including recruitment,
selection, compensation, appraisal, and promotion. The study identified barriers such as "glass ceilings" and
"labyrinths" that hinder women's progress within organizations, emphasizing the widespread nature of gender
discrimination.

At the core of gender bias and its resulting discrimination were gender stereotypes, which were described as widely
held preconceptions about the attributes of men and women. The study highlighted the enduring nature of these
stereotypes, depicting women as communal and men as agentic. Importantly, the study differentiated between
descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes, with descriptive stereotypes outlining what men and women are
like and prescriptive stereotypes detailing what men and women should be like.

Descriptive gender stereotypes were identified as playing a crucial role in shaping evaluative decisions about women
in the workplace. These stereotypes functioned as heuristics, allowing evaluators to form quick impressions based on
group membership rather than individual characteristics. The study suggested that while women and the
characteristics attributed to them were often highly regarded, the recall of information that confirmed stereotypes
was more prevalent than information that refuted them.

The study further examined moderators of descriptive bias, emphasizing the importance of contextual factors in
influencing gender discrimination. Factors such as personal qualities (e.g., motherhood status and physical
attractiveness), structural arrangements (e.g., token or minority status), and policies meant to benefit women (e.g.,
affirmative action and diversity initiatives) were identified as enhancing the visibility of gender and contributing to
biased evaluations.

The gender-type of jobs was explored as a critical factor influencing gender discrimination. The lack of fit model was
referenced, indicating that female stereotypes conflicted with the perceived requirements of male-typed positions,
intensifying gender bias. The study highlighted that gender discrimination was more pronounced in jobs that were
male in gender-type, supported by evidence from various fields and occupations. It was noted that biased
evaluations against women were more prevalent in higher organizational levels, contributing to the
underrepresentation of women in leadership roles.

In conclusion, the study by Heilman et al. (2018) provided a comprehensive examination of gender discrimination in
the workplace, emphasizing the persistent nature of gender disparities and the role of gender stereotypes in shaping
biased evaluations and decisions about women across various stages of employment.

Van Laer, K., & Janssens, M. (2011). Ethnic minority professionals’ experiences with subtle discrimination in the
workplace. Human Relations, 64(9), 1203-1227. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0018726711409263

Van Laer et al. (2011) conducted a qualitative study focused on understanding the experiences of subtle
discrimination in the workplace among ethnic minority professionals of Turkish or Maghrebi descent in Flanders. The
study, based on 26 in-depth interviews, identified three key elements characterizing subtle discrimination in the
workplace.

The first element highlighted by the study is the ambiguity associated with subtle discrimination. Subtle
discrimination often manifests in a way that is not overt, and it involves disempowerment through seemingly
empowering behavior. This aspect underscores the complexity of subtle discrimination, where actions may appear
positive or empowering on the surface but result in disempowerment for minority professionals.

The second key element revolves around the role of power in subtle discrimination processes. The study identified
four processes of power—normalization, legitimization of only the individual, legitimization as the Other, and
naturalization. These processes, occurring through everyday incidents, contribute to the subtle disempowerment of
minority individuals in the workplace. The study emphasizes the insidious nature of these power dynamics and how
they operate in everyday interactions.

The third element discussed in the study is the connection between subtle discrimination in the workplace and
broader societal structures and discourses. The authors argue that workplace encounters reflect and reproduce
societal structures and discourses. Subtle discrimination is not confined to individual interactions but is linked to
larger societal issues, permeating the workplace and being sustained through day-to-day encounters.

In summary, Van Laer et al.'s (2011) study contributes to the understanding of subtle discrimination experienced by
ethnic minority professionals. It highlights the ambiguity of subtle discrimination, the role of power dynamics in
disempowering minority individuals, and the interconnectedness between workplace experiences and broader
societal structures and discourses. The qualitative approach, relying on in-depth interviews, provides insights into
the nuanced nature of subtle discrimination in the workplace.

Suveren, Y. (2022). Unconscious Bias: Definition and Significance. Psikiyatride Guncel Yaklasimlar, 14(3), 414-426.
http://www.cappsy.org/archives/vol14/no3/cap_14_03_14_en.pdf

Suveren's (2022) study delves into the concept of unconscious bias, highlighting its origins in the human brain's use
of shortcuts to make quick decisions. The study emphasizes that unconscious bias influences perceptions of the
world and individuals, often leading to decisions based on generalizations and preconceptions rather than objective
parameters.

The author stresses the importance of understanding and overcoming unconscious bias by detecting it within
individuality and social relations. While acknowledging the progress made in combating classical prejudice or bias,
the study points out that many individuals remain largely unaware of their unconscious biases. This lack of
awareness poses a serious threat to personal and social relations, necessitating openness and alertness to one's own
unconscious biases.
The study underscores the need for conscious awareness and efforts to raise awareness about unconscious bias at
the individual, social, and scientific levels. It suggests that recognizing and facing unconscious bias is crucial,
especially in research and scientific endeavors. Unconscious bias can manifest in various forms, affecting
relationships by belittling those with different views, favoring similar social backgrounds, prioritizing specific genders,
and dismissing alternative perspectives from different educational levels.

The discussion emphasizes that the human brain, unable to process all information simultaneously, is prone to
unconscious biases. The study outlines different manifestations of bias, including gender bias, age discrimination,
name bias, appearance bias, proximity bias, and confirmation bias. Scientific theories, such as the dual attitude
system 1 thinking model and social identity theory, form the basis of the debate on unconscious bias.

Suveren's study also explores the presence of implicit bias in various industries, including schools, workplaces,
healthcare, politics, and the legal sector. The article concludes by offering advice on overcoming implicit biases in
these areas and suggesting actionable steps to address the impact of unconscious bias. The study positions
recognizing and suppressing unconscious bias as a skill that requires conscious effort and practice.

Filut, A., Kaatz, A., & Carnes, M. (2017). The impact of unconscious bias on women's career advancement. The
Sasakawa Peace Foundation: Tokyo, Japan. https://www.spf.org/en/global-image/units/upfiles/163038-1-
20211216165119_b61baeff7486a9.pdf

Filut, Kaatz, and Carnes (2017) conducted a comprehensive study on the impact of unconscious bias on women's
career advancement, outlining various facets of unconscious gender bias and its implications.

The study begins by highlighting the persistence of stereotypic assumptions about men and women, emphasizing
traits associated with each gender. The traits stereotypically linked with men are described as agentic, including
qualities such as aggressiveness, decisiveness, technical skills, strength, and logic. In contrast, traits associated with
women are communal, encompassing characteristics like submissiveness, quietness, caring, relational skills, and
nurturing. The study underlines the cultural pervasiveness of these stereotypes and their impact on career-related
decisions.

The authors introduce the Goldberg design, a randomized experiment conducted by Philip Goldberg in 1968, as a
paradigm to illustrate how unconscious gender bias affects evaluations based on gendered names. This design has
been consistently used to reveal that both male and female evaluators tend to rate women applicants as less
competent, less hirable, and deserving of lower salaries than equally qualified men, particularly for high-status or
leadership positions. The study emphasizes the stability of gender bias over three decades of research.

Real-world data reflecting the impact of unconscious gender bias in science laboratories is presented, revealing a
lower acceptance rate for female graduate students, fewer authorship opportunities for female graduate students,
salary disparities, and gender-based promotion discrepancies. The study also references the underrepresentation of
women in leadership roles in major U.S. companies.

The authors introduce the Implicit Association Test (IAT) as a widely used measure of unconscious bias, illustrating its
application to gender bias. The IAT demonstrates that individuals often associate male names with science-related
words and female names with liberal arts or domestic roles, consistent with cultural stereotypes. The study
emphasizes the importance of IATs in raising awareness about unconscious bias, even if their impact on behavior
may be inconsistent.

The study further discusses the disadvantages resulting from unconscious gender bias, such as the "think manager-
think male" phenomenon, penalties for self-promotion or negotiation by women, and biases against certain
communication styles. However, the authors also highlight potential opportunities, including the perception of
effectiveness for women in top leadership, the advantage of women leaders seeking help without negative
repercussions, and the effectiveness of women in negotiation on behalf of others.

In conclusion, the study acknowledges the omnipresence of unconscious gender bias, attributing its endurance to
cultural messages reinforcing stereotypic assumptions. Despite the challenges, the study identifies effective
strategies to mitigate the negative consequences of unconscious gender bias on women's career advancement in
Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM).

Atewologun, D., Cornish, T., & Tresh, F. (2018). Unconscious bias: training. An assessment of the evidence for
effectiveness. Equality and human rights commission research report, 113.
https://archive.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research-report-113-unconcious-bais-training-an-
assessment-of-the-evidence-for-effectiveness-pdf.pdf

Atewologun et al. (2018) conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of Unconscious Bias Training (UBT), focusing
on various aspects, including awareness raising, implicit bias, explicit bias, and behavior change.

The study emphasizes that raising awareness of bias is a primary aim of UBT, and the evidence suggests that this goal
is often achieved. Both online and face-to-face delivery methods for UBT have been effective in raising awareness,
with the effects proving to be long-lasting. However, the study emphasizes the need for UBT evaluations to measure
and manage bias awareness and to assess the long-term effects of awareness raising on bias. It also highlights the
potential for back-firing effects, where teaching participants about stereotypes may inadvertently make negative
stereotypes more accessible, urging further study on this effect.

Regarding implicit bias, the evidence indicates consistent short-term reduction through UBT. Strategies such as using
counter-stereotypic exemplars and evaluative conditioning have been effective in reducing implicit bias. Mindfulness
is also identified as a successful strategy for implicit bias reduction. The study notes that sophisticated, habit-
breaking UBT designs with long-term interventions and a combination of awareness-raising and bias mitigation
strategies show promise in reducing implicit biases, especially for those with stronger implicit biases pre-
intervention.

In contrast, the study suggests that UBT is less likely to be effective in changing explicit bias. This is attributed to
several reasons, including people's tendency to believe they do not hold explicit prejudiced attitudes, the likelihood
of social desirability bias in disclosing explicit bias, and the focus of UBT content on implicit biases rather than
explicit bias levels. The study acknowledges that most UBT interventions include measures of explicit bias to assess
their impact on these biases.

The assessment of behavior change resulting from UBT is acknowledged to be challenging, with weak and limited
evidence based on self-report assessments of behavioral intentions rather than independent observations of actual
behavior change. The study highlights the difficulty in operationalizing and measuring behavior change but notes
recent evidence suggesting that sophisticated habit-breaking interventions can have a long-term impact on behavior
up to two years post-intervention. The authors suggest that further studies, incorporating frequent assessments,
relevant measures, extended time periods, and control groups, could strengthen the evidence on behavior change
resulting from UBT. Additionally, measuring how subjects of bias perceive participants' behavior change is discussed
as another method, revealing discrepancies between participants' beliefs about their behavior and others' beliefs.

Grewal, D., Ku, M. C., Girod, S. C., & Valantine, H. (2013). How to recognize and address unconscious bias. The
academic medicine handbook: A guide to achievement and fulfillment for academic faculty, 405-412.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-5693-3_49

Grewal et al. (2013) address the persistent underrepresentation of women and racial minorities among medical
school faculty despite an increase in their pursuit of medical careers. The study suggests that unconscious bias may
contribute to this disparity, defined as opinions held about social groups that operate outside conscious awareness.
The chapter provides insights into the nature of unconscious bias and its potential impact on the careers of women
and minority faculty members. It delves into the reasons behind the existence of unconscious bias, drawing on social
science research.

The study highlights the ways in which unconscious bias affects the careers of junior faculty members, emphasizing
the need to understand and counteract its influence. Specific strategies are outlined for individuals to prevent
unconscious bias from negatively affecting their careers. These strategies encompass promoting awareness in
oneself and others, fostering a growth mindset, building and maintaining robust professional networks, and taking
an active role in personal career development. Additionally, the study offers recommendations to institutions on
addressing unconscious bias in hiring processes. This includes educating search committees, ensuring neutral job
descriptions, and advocating for structured interview processes within departments. The chapter emphasizes the
importance of collective efforts at both individual and institutional levels to mitigate the impact of unconscious bias
on the representation of women and minorities in medical school faculties.

Sipe, S. R., Larson, L., Mckay, B. A., & Moss, J. (2016). Taking off the blinders: A comparative study of university
students’ changing perceptions of gender discrimination in the workplace from 2006 to 2013. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 15(2), 232-249. https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amle.2014.0139

Sipe et al. (2016) focus on the pressing issue of gender inequity in the workforce, acknowledging the societal
importance given to eradicating gender discrimination, as evidenced by recent legislation and media attention.
Despite this societal focus, the study notes a stark contrast between the emphasis on justice and the persistent
gender wage gap, the ongoing number of gender discrimination suits, and high-profile cases exposed in the media.

The study builds on previous data collected in 2006, revealing that the group poised to enter the workforce, namely
university students, did not perceive gender discrimination as a significant threat to themselves or others. The
research serves as both a continuation and a comparison to the 2006 study, with the aim of determining whether
the perspective of university students has evolved over time. The findings indicate a shift in awareness among the
cohort, with students demonstrating increased awareness of gender discrimination issues. Notably, this heightened
awareness extends to an increased concern for gender discrimination against men. However, the study identifies a
persistent reluctance among students to believe that they personally will be affected by gender discrimination,
indicating a surprising continuation of this mindset despite increased overall awareness.

Bilkis, A., Habib, S. B., & Sharmin, T. (2010). A review of discrimination in employment and workplace. ASA University
review, 4(2), 137-150. https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/76621860/v4n2sl13-libre.pdf?
1639725890=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename
%3DA_Review_of_Discrimination_in_Employment.pdf&Expires=1702106126&Signature=F7hqz9XxRdX3LA091j7sZBD
A0bUqzMr6qvbQUBJ-LIIKABPagNi6U1aj4eRhJABoZpwWBUDoD49cEpDkLu0i0kfMRFNEzVtO28KqA-
IV0dkeqCwVvhVFLklpsrpjG1NKlRyPDs8HNmbAEVdSaoF8Qw3YdxbhtRxsl~GG-
gcuTWTpRs~dz6JnVfKBTGSySZp3JEtfcw2UpxBjeGyCe7OIFx33-i~tTSE02MB07HaZ215X7o-
SuJa3Cs2gcfeMho5lb01kBKYDjz1Q6AZWJK8ufvKFh2be4oDD9c3Xhfy6LIXH1lSh~eSoCLMt6WPB9zXxeawdsl21KHGdR
WMdHNO9TQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

Bilkis et al. (2010) delve into the critical challenges contributing to the failure factors related to gender discrimination
in employment and workplaces. The discriminatory environment for women in offices is discussed, and it is noted
that the causes of gender discrimination begin influencing a woman's career choice. Factors such as employment
capabilities, bargaining power, nature of work, and workload complicate a woman's choice of occupation from the
outset. The study highlights the lack of institutional effort for women's employment improvement and asserts that
workplace choices made by women often perpetuate income disparities compared to men.

The research identifies six choices made by women that contribute to their gender's lower incomes. These choices
include the frequent decision to drop out for a few years to raise children, avoiding workaholic behavior required for
executive roles, choosing to avoid physically demanding jobs, opting for advanced degrees leading to lower-paid
social welfare jobs, and cultural differences in the pursuit of earning power.

The study also discusses various forms of gender bias at workplaces. It classifies gender bias into categories such as
pecuniary bias, biasness as to opportunities, personal bias, and authority bias. The authors emphasize the persistent
nature of gender bias despite positive movements toward gender equity, particularly in workplaces.

In conclusion, the authors assert that no country has successfully eliminated the gender gap, and discrimination
stories persist. Recommendations are provided, including regular surveys, integration of gender equality into
national planning, monitoring progress to eliminate gender bias, improving knowledge and awareness on gender
equality, establishing family codes, ensuring women's supervisory authority in all sectors, increasing coefficients of
work experience and education for women, and framing specific service rules for various organizational positions.
The study highlights the imbalance of power in society and emphasizes the need for equal participation of males and
females in development activities to achieve millennium goals. The authors call for outlining more issues, strategies,
and targets for gender equality to remove all forms of biasness and discrimination in employment and ensure a
healthy workplace environment for women.