CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 167Doctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsHigher Education Research StudiesWork-Family Balance Challenges

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gender and doctoral studies: the perceptions of Ph.D. students in an American university

Kurtz‐Costes, Beth, Andrews Helmke, Laura, Ülkü‐Steiner, Beril·2006·Gender and Education
DOI 10.1080/09540250500380513
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Twenty students enrolled in Ph.D. programmes were interviewed to examine the role of gender in their academic experiences. Gender was examined in three ways: gender of the student, gender of the student’s faculty supervisor and gender make‐up of the faculty within the student’s department or academic unit. All students reported the importance of supportive faculty mentors and that financial worries, time pressure and the uncertainty of future employment were sources of stress. Family formation and striving toward personal as well as professional goals were particularly of concern for women, as were perceptions of differential treatment. Women students valued women faculty mentors, although female faculty were perceived as less supportive than male faculty of family concerns when these women had themselves sacrificed family formation for the sake of their careers. Both men and women experienced less stress and reported greater career commitment when faculty in their departments exhibited less traditional values regarding the balancing of personal and professional goals. The implications of these findings for reducing doctoral student attrition rates and for creating a more supportive environment for Ph.D. students are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09540250500380513

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Bagilhole B., 1994, Changing the subject: women in higher education
  2. 10.1177/135050680100800203 · DOI
  3. Bourner T., 2001, Studies in Higher Education, 26, 65, 10.1080/03075070124819 · DOI
  4. Gale S. F., 2001, Workforce, 80, 38
  5. 2001, Characteristics of doctoral scientists and engineers in the United States. NSF 03–310
  6. 10.2307/2524779 · DOI
  7. Schlegel M., 2000, Monitor on Psychology, 31, 33
  8. Schor J. B., 1992, The overworked American
  9. 2002, Arab states: a regional report
  10. Williams E. E., 1984, Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 173
  11. 10.1207/s15328023top2401_3 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 167

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kurtz‐Costes, B., Andrews Helmke, L., & Ülkü‐Steiner, B.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Kurtz‐Costes, Beth
ORCID
Kurtz‐Costes, Beth
Venue
Gender and Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2006-03
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
137-155
ISSN
  • 0954-0253 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0516
DOI
10.1080/09540250500380513
OpenAlex
W2009639664
Cited by
167
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Gender and Education (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
Keywords
gender, doctoral students, faculty mentoring, women in academia, work-family balance, academic stress, doctoral attrition, career commitment, gender discrimination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review