(1) Background: Despite the progress made by women in the workplace, mothers still face systemic barriers that prevent them from advancing professionally. This “motherhood penalty” involves a variety of discriminatory practices and experiences that mothers can face at work, including being held to stricter standards regarding salary and recruitment. Despite ongoing research on the association between motherhood and career outcomes, few studies specifically explore how motherhood impacts career advancement and, consequently, access to leadership. This scoping review seeks to gain an understanding of how motherhood impacts women’s career progression, and how interventions can address the underrepresentation of mothers in leadership. (2) Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR framework, we analyzed 52 articles from 2010 to 2022, drawn from 10 databases. (3) Results: The results showed both negative and positive impacts of motherhood on career progression, affecting mothers’ attitudes, feelings, and behaviors and yielding changes in interpersonal relationships and work conditions. Intersectionality is highlighted, urging a nuanced examination of challenges faced by mothers from a diversity of backgrounds. Recommendations for interventions include individual and institutional efforts, comprising societal support structures, organizational policy changes, and cultural shifts. (4) Conclusions: This scoping review offers an updated perspective on a classic challenge, providing practical insights for a more inclusive and structural understanding of the career trajectories of working mothers.

The Impact of Motherhood on Women’s Career Progression: A Scoping Review of Evidence-Based Interventions

The realization that most behavioral science research focuses on cultures labeled as WEIRD-Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (Arnett, 2008; Henrich et al., 2010; Thalmayer et al., 2021)-has given an impetus to extend the research to more diverse populations. Confucian East Asian societies have relatively strong social and technological infrastructure to advance science and thus have gained much prominence in cross-cultural studies. This has inadvertently fostered another bias: the dominance of WEIRD-Confucian comparisons and a tendency to draw conclusions about "non-WEIRD" cultures in general based on data from Confucian societies. Here, analyzing 1,466,019 scientific abstracts and, separately, coverage of 60 large-scale cross-cultural psychological projects (Nsamples = 2,668 from Ncountries = 153 covering nparticipants = 3,722,940), we quantify the dominance of Confucian over other non-WEIRD cultures in psychological research. Our analysis also reveals the underrepresentation of non-European Union postcommunist societies and the almost total invisibility of Pacific Island, Caribbean, Middle African, and Central Asian societies within the research database of psychology. We call for a shift in cross-cultural studies toward midsize (7+ countries) and ideally large-scale (50+ countries) cross-cultural studies, and we propose mitigations that we believe could aid the inclusion of diverse researchers as well as participants from underrepresented cultures in our field. People in all world regions and cultures deserve psychological knowledge that applies to them. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

WEIRD-Confucian comparisons: Ongoing cultural biases in psychology's evidence base and some recommendations for improving global representation.

While much progress has been made towards gender equality, diversity and inclusion in the workplace, education and society, recent years have also revealed continuing challenges that slow or halt this progress. To date, the majority of gender equality action has tended to approach gender equality from one side: being focused on the need to remove barriers for girls and women. We argue that this is only half the battle, and that a focus on men is MANdatory, highlighting three key areas: First, we review men’s privileged status as being potentially threatened by progress in gender equality, and the effects of these threats for how men engage in gender-equality progress. Second, we highlight how men themselves are victims of restrictive gender roles, and the consequences of this for men’s physical and mental health, and for their engagement at work and at home. Third, we review the role of men as allies in the fight for gender equality, and on the factors that impede and may aid in increasing men’s involvement. We end with recommendations for work organizations, educational institutions and society at large to reach and involve men as positive agents of social change.

MANdatory - why men need (and are needed for) gender equality progress

Gender inequities can be partly traced back to gender differences in working time arrangements. In fact, it is established knowledge that women as compared to men are more (less) likely to work part-time (overtime). Based on social role theory, however, we also expect gender differences among part-time and overtime workers, such that women and men differ in why they work part-time or overtime. In a preregistered and highly powered study conducted in Germany (N = 3,844–17,361, depending on the analysis), we observed that, on average, women were more likely than men to work part-time (i.e., fewer than 35 hours per week) because of personal or family obligations. Moreover, in comparison to men, women were less likely to work overtime (i.e., at least two hours per week) to attain additional income, but more likely to work overtime to step in for colleagues. Altogether, people had “gendered” reasons to work certain hours. Furthermore, as people’s paid working time arrangements are intertwined with their lives outside of the workplace, we examined women’s and men’s work–life interface and observed that women (as compared to men) deemed it less acceptable to be available for work-related issues during leisure time. We discuss implications for future theorizing and for practitioners who aim to design work schedules that consider the different lived experiences of women and men. 

Similar, but Different: Gender Differences in Working Time Arrangements and the Work–Life Interface

This study investigates prescriptive (how women and men should be) and proscriptive (how women and men should not be) gender stereotypes in Sweden and how these stereotypes relate to self‐ascribed gendered traits. In an online survey with students at three major universities ( N = 679) it was found that participants believed that the societal view was that women should be more communal than men, but less dominant and men should be more agentic than women, but less weak. In comparison, self‐ratings only differed for communion, such that women rated themselves as more communal than men (there were no differences in self‐ratings of agency, dominance, or weakness). Thus, prescriptive and proscriptive stereotypes and self‐views differed. Women mainly perceived differences between self‐ratings and prescriptions of communion, whereas men mainly perceived differences between self‐ratings and prescriptions of agency. Moreover, women mainly perceived differences between self‐ratings and proscriptions of dominance, and men mainly perceived differences between self‐ratings and proscriptions of weakness. Hence, both women and men perceive larger gaps between self‐evaluations and societally desired and undesired gender stereotypical traits. Future studies should investigate the consequences of such mismatches. 

Differences between prescriptive and proscriptive gender stereotypes and gendered self‐evaluations in Sweden

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/pops.12880

Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 Countries

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Sameir Quta

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Gender Gap in Parental Leave Intentions: Evidence from 37 Countries