Abstract

Christians are one of the most underrepresented groups in science, and one potential explanation is that scientists have a bias against Christian students, which could discourage and actively prevent Christian students from becoming scientists. Although there is a general perception in society that there is bias against Christians in science, we do not know whether science students, who frequently interact with scientists, perceive this bias. Further, no researchers have attempted to experimentally document the existence of bias against Christians in science. To address these gaps in the literature, we designed three studies. In the first study, we found that college science students report a perceived bias against Christians in science and that evangelical Christians perceive greater bias than Catholic and non-Christian students. Then in two studies, biology professors evaluated Ph.D. program applicants and we examined whether the professors rated a student less favorably when the student revealed a Christian religious identity. We found no statistically significant differences in how biology professors rated a student who was President of the Christian Association compared to a student who was President of the Atheist Association or a student who was President of the Activities Association. However, in Study 3, biology professors did rate a Christian student who went on a mission trip with Campus Crusade for Christ as less hireable, less competent, and less likeable than a student who did not reveal a Christian identity. Taken together, these studies indicate that perceived bias against Christians in science may contribute to underrepresentation of Christians but actual bias against Christians in science may be restricted to a specific type of Christianity that scientists call fundamentalist and/or evangelical.

Highlights

  • Christians make up approximately 75% of the American public, only about 30% of academic scientists identify as Christian [1,2], making Christians one of the most underrepresented groups in science [3] [academic scientists generally have graduate degrees, academic

  • First we examined whether these scientists showed evidence of bias against a Christian student, in the following study whether scientists showed evidence of bias against a Christian student who went on a mission trip with Campus Crusade for Christ, an organization often associated with evangelism

  • Study 1 discussion In Study 1, we found that the perception that there is bias against Christians in science is present among college science students just as this perception is present among the American public, psychology students, and Protestant biologists [14,15]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Christians make up approximately 75% of the American public, only about 30% of academic scientists identify as Christian [1,2], making Christians one of the most underrepresented groups in science [3] [academic scientists generally have graduate degrees, academic. We found no statistically significant differences in biologists’ ratings for any measure between the three conditions (hireability: F(2,491) = .805, η2 = .001, p = .45; competence: F(2,491) = .775, η2 = .003, p = .46; likeability: F(2,491) = .715, η2 = .000, p = .49) indicating that, on average, scientists perceived the Christian, atheist, and control “activities” students as qualified for a Ph.D. program by these measures. In Study 2 we found that scientists rated potential Ph.D. students who indicated a Christian identity, atheist identity, or no religious identity (control condition) as hireable, competent, and likeable. We used ANOVAs with post hoc Exploring real and perceived bias against Christians in academic biology comparisons to test an interaction effect between faculty religious affiliation and study condition for hireability, competence, and likeability scores. The findings from these three studies illustrate important nuances in bias against Christians in science by highlighting that (a) in at least some contexts, perceived bias against Christians in science may not be an accurate perception and (b) bias may be specific towards what scientists characterize as “fundamentalist” and/or “evangelical” Christian individuals [19]

Limitations and future directions
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call