↓ Skip to main content

Women’s Reasons for Leaving the Engineering Field

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
28 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
58 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Women’s Reasons for Leaving the Engineering Field
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00875
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nadya A. Fouad, Wen-Hsin Chang, Min Wan, Romila Singh

Abstract

Among the different Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math fields, engineering continues to have one of the highest rates of attrition (Hewlett et al., 2008). The turnover rate for women engineers from engineering fields is even higher than for men (Frehill, 2010). Despite increased efforts from researchers, there are still large gaps in our understanding of the reasons that women leave engineering. This study aims to address this gap by examining the reasons why women leave engineering. Specifically, we analyze the reasons for departure given by national sample of 1,464 women engineers who left the profession after having worked in the engineering field. We applied a person-environment fit theoretical lens, in particular, the Theory of Work Adjustment (TWA) (Dawis and Lofquist, 1984) to understand and categorize the reasons for leaving the engineering field. According to the TWA, occupations have different "reinforcer patterns," reflected in six occupational values, and a mismatch between the reinforcers provided by the work environment and individuals' needs may trigger departure from the environment. Given the paucity of literature in this area, we posed research questions to explore the reinforcer pattern of values implicated in women's decisions to leave the engineering field. We used qualitative analyses to understand, categorize, and code the 1,863 statements that offered a glimpse into the myriad reasons that women offered in describing their decisions to leave the engineering profession. Our results revealed the top three sets of reasons underlying women's decision to leave the jobs and engineering field were related to: first, poor and/or inequitable compensation, poor working conditions, inflexible and demanding work environment that made work-family balance difficult; second, unmet achievement needs that reflected a dissatisfaction with effective utilization of their math and science skills, and third, unmet needs with regard to lack of recognition at work and adequate opportunities for advancement. Implications of these results for future research as well as the design of effective intervention programs aimed at women engineers' retention and engagement in engineering are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 167 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 15%
Student > Master 21 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 10%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 54 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 28 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 19 11%
Psychology 18 11%
Engineering 17 10%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 61 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 267. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2022.
All research outputs
#132,890
of 25,134,448 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#275
of 33,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,895
of 320,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#10
of 610 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,134,448 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,946 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 610 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.