Women’s underrepresentation in male-dominated fields of study is often attributed to a gender gap in success expectations. Prior research shows that female students report lower confidence in their academic abilities and future success than men, not only in male-dominated but also in female-dominated and gender-integrated fields. These lower success expectations can negatively affect women’s academic paths, making it important to understand the factors that shape them. Although existing studies highlight the positive role of social experiences in shaping women’s success expectations, particularly in male-dominated fields, women are also more likely than men to experience discrimination, which may undermine these benefits. However, the role of discrimination experiences in shaping success expectations in higher education remains underexplored. This study examines how female students’ discrimination experiences contribute to the gender gap in students’ success expectations and investigates whether the relationship between discrimination experiences and success expectations among female students varies across fields of study with varying gender ratios. Using data from 9,512 students collected as part of the Student Survey in Germany (SiD), we analyze female students’ discrimination experiences and their associations with success expectations in male-dominated, female-dominated, and gender-integrated fields of study. The results show that women, particularly in male-dominated fields, report higher levels of discrimination than men. These experiences contribute to the overall gender gap in success expectations. However, detailed analyses reveal that only relational discrimination experiences, such as social exclusion or unfair treatment, are significantly associated with female students’ success expectations, revealing a seeming paradox: this association emerges primarily in female-dominated rather than male-dominated fields, even though female students experience more discrimination in the latter. This suggests that the consequences of discrimination for success expectations are context-dependent and may reflect different coping strategies across disciplines. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of distinguishing between types of discrimination and contexts when examining gender disparities in success expectations. Furthermore, they underscore the need for targeted interventions addressing relational discrimination to support women’s academic confidence in higher education.
Gender disparities in academia persist worldwide, yet empirical evidence remains limited on where, at which stages, and to what extent women exit academic careers. Using a uniquely comprehensive, decade-long national dataset from Japan (2014–2023), this study provides system-level evidence of gendered attrition across six disciplinary fields and four academic ranks. By distinguishing among the potential pool, applicant pool, and hiring outcomes, the analysis separates application-stage processes from hiring-stage outcomes—an analytical distinction rarely possible in other national contexts due to data limitations. The findings indicate that the application stage constitutes the primary bottleneck in women’s academic careers. Across fields, women’s underrepresentation appears to be driven less by disadvantage at the point of selection than by the fact that many qualified women do not apply for academic positions. Once applications are submitted, hiring outcomes are generally neutral or, in some cases, favorable to women, with lecturer-level recruitment showing evidence of proactive intervention. Rank-level analyses further indicate that women’s attrition is pronounced at career entry and continues at mid- and senior-career stages in most fields. Field-level analyses highlight substantial heterogeneity in how and when attrition occurs. By separating application-stage attrition from hiring outcomes and examining patterns across ranks and disciplines, this study refines existing accounts of gender inequality in academia. The results highlight the importance of organizational and structural factors shaping application behavior and cumulative disadvantage, and underscore the policy relevance of collecting detailed applicant-flow data. Overall, the findings suggest that stage-specific and discipline-sensitive interventions are essential for addressing persistent gendered disparities in academia.
Adopting an “equal but different” perspective, this study investigates long-term changes in gendered patterns of university enrolment and field-of-study choice in Italy, focusing on the care-technical divide among cohorts of upper secondary school graduates from 1995 to 2022. Leveraging a unique longitudinal harmonization of survey data from the National Institute of Statistics with administrative educational databases, the analysis accounts for gender differences in prior secondary school track choice and academic performance. Results show that the female advantage in Higher Education (HE) participation largely disappears once differences in prior schooling are considered, suggesting that the gender reversal in enrolments reflects gendered educational pathways rather than a net advantage for women. However, a modest and persistent female advantage emerges in the second half of the 2000s, after the incorporation of traditionally feminized fields such as teaching and nursing into HE. Most importantly, gender disparities in field-of-study choice, particularly along the care-technical divide, have remained strikingly stable across cohorts, despite profound changes in overall participation levels. These findings highlight the resilience of horizontal gender segregation in HE and call into question the extent to which the expansion of women’s access to university has translated into more gender-equal educational outcomes.
