Gender inequalities during COVID-19
Open accessAbstract
The onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic put a halt to progress toward gender equality and, instead, exacerbated existing gender inequalities across domains—from gendered divisions of labour to economic stability. In this paper we document some of the most glaring gender inequalities that have arisen in the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how social psychological theories and research—including work on gender stereotypes and roles, responses to threat, precarious masculinity, perceptions of risk, and backlash—can help to explain the roots of these inequalities. In doing so, we use a broad definition of gender and consider relevant intersections of identity. Finally, we present three key considerations for research on gender inequalities moving forward. Namely, the need for social psychologists to (a) challenge binary conceptualizations of gender, (b) broaden the focus of research on gender inequalities, and (c) adopt an intersectional lens to address systemic inequalities in the wake of COVID-19.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The shock of the COVID-19 pandemic may exacerbate social inequalities.
“Third, in terms of theoretical contributions, from the perspective of adolescent mental health loss, our research implies that the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic may exacerbate social inequalities.”
From COVID-19 pandemic and adolescent mental health in China: Micro evidence and socioeconomic mechanisms (2022) · cites this paper as Fisher and Ryan, 2021
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 189
- Authors
- Fisher, A. N., & Ryan, M. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Exeter (GB)
- University of Groningen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Fisher, Alexandra N.
- Venue
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2021-02
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 237-245
- ISSN
- 1368-4302 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7188
- OpenAlex
- W3133881017
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 20
- FWCI
- 51.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Group Processes & Intergroup Relations (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- European Commission (725128)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
- Keywords
- gender inequality, COVID-19 pandemic, gender stereotypes, gender roles, threat response, risk perception, backlash, intersectionality, economic stability, division of labor
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