Abstract:

Men and women have more similarities than differences in cognitive competence, and the authors (especially based on recent neuroscience or meta-study studies) converge on the idea that they achieve the same results but using different cognitive processes. The social representation that men are better (for a long time) in STEM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), is falling apart with new studies, being much better explained (the small differences found) for social and educational reasons. On the other hand, recent research in neuropsychological sciences shows that women tend to be more competent in some areas (e.g. action planning, social skills, conflict resolution) than men (usually better in the mathematics and spatial reasoning). At the same time, most tests and evaluations performed by companies, employment agencies and schools, are based on much more favorable parameters for male candidates (the result of decades of gender-biased research), which obviously leads to major injustices in terms of equal opportunities. If men and women are equally competent in different areas, why is selection and promotion of responsible positions overwhelmingly masculine? Eventually part of the problem lies in the instruments we use to evaluate them. This study aims to present the project GeNeus - Gender Neutral and Testing Tools for Selection Processes, a project that aims to develop, promote and integrate a gender-neutral (and free) selection and toolset. Using the tools developed in this project to select people for access to jobs and education will increase gender neutrality and thus may contribute to reducing the school dropout rate and improving the success rate of women in recruitment and selection processes, contributing to equal educational and professional opportunities for men and women. The study presents its main results and reflections, as well as recommendations to professionals.