Curbing Gender Bias in Journalistic Work : the Role of Awareness

(1)

Running head: CURBING GENDER BIAS IN JOURNALISTIC WORK

Curbing Gender Bias in Journalistic Work The Role of Awareness

Priyanka Kalra 11896566 Master’s Thesis

Graduate School of Communication Supervisor: Dr Mark Boukes

(2)

CURBING GENDER BIAS IN JOURNALISTIC WORK

Abstract

This study examines the effects of awareness of implicit gender bias on journalistic decision making. By experimenting directly on journalists, the study establishes a link between journalists’ awareness of their implicit gender bias and objective decision making. In a unique experimental setup, journalists were administered an Implicit Associations Test to ascertain their implicit gender bias, followed by decision making vignettes, which revealed their journalistic decision making process. The results indicate that awareness of implicit gender bias plays a key role in decreasing the chances of biased journalistic content by impacting journalists’ decision making. The experiment highlights that journalists who are made aware of their implicit cognitive biases before making the journalistic decisions are more sensitive to cognitive bias errors as compared to the journalists who are not made aware of them. While offering a novel experimental framework for exposing how journalists think, these results help ascertain solutions for curbing bias in journalism.

(3)

“When men become conscious of psychological processes of which they have been unconscious or half conscious of, not only are they on their guard against the exploitation of those processes

in themselves by others, but they become better able to control them from within.” (Wallas, 1908, p. 167)

Introduction

The process of journalistic decision making has been studied from various angles. Special focus has been given to concepts like framing, priming and agenda-setting (Schuck, 2014,

Entman, 2004, Iyengar & Simon, 1993). Prior studies have also examined the role of

organisational and environmental factors (Van Aelst & Vliegenthart, 2014, Domingo, 2008, McManus, 2005, Hilgartner & Bosk, 1988) in journalism, but the focus has almost always delineated the final product (the news) from its creator (the journalist).

The focus on organisational factors as the main influence on journalistic production in research has been referred to as organisational functionalism (Cottle, 2007). According to Cottle (2007), this emphasis on theorisation of professional norms and practices has encroached on the idea of individual journalistic agency and how personal journalistic decisions affect the news product. Due to the lack of a “comprehensive set of data on how journalists think on the job” (Christian, 2013, 172), the relationship between an individual’s cognitive biases and the faulty journalistic decisions has not been explored. This becomes problematic as without any empirical evidence on the issue, it is implied that the producer has little to no impact on their product.

This ignorance of the individual level influence (Reese & Shoemaker, 2016) in news decisions overlooks the current journalism scenario where individual journalists hold a lot of agency over what is published, for example, breaking news and online stories (Pavlik, 2010).

(4)

Also, this ignorance of individual influence in media research deems disastrous when read next to psychology studies that explicate human cognition and information processing failures (eg. Bakker et. al, 2016; De Martino, 2006; Capara & Zimbardo, 2004). Psychologists have constantly stressed the influence of emotions, heuristics and personality on information

processing and decisions making in individuals. Yet, the effect of these influences on journalists, one of the primary sources of information for citizens, has hardly been investigated in media research.

In today’s time with the trust in media at an all-time low and journalism being repeatedly accused of bias (Nicolaou & Giles, 2017), research needs to do more than just highlight the prevalence of the said bias through content analysis studies. Once established that reportage is not always objective, there needs to be a shift in focus towards the manifestation of bias and how to control it. This study aims to enable that, by exposing the prevalence of implicit and

journalistic gender bias in Indian journalists and then ascertaining concrete, empirical solutions to the problem. Other than adding to theoretical knowledge, by using empirical data, this study offers a solution to the perennial patriarchy in the Indian society (Chakravarty, 1993).

The primary aim of this study is to expose the possibility of implicit and journalistic gender biases in journalists and breakaway from the normative assumptions attributed to journalists by media researchers (Althaus, 2002). Journalistic gender bias in this study is considered as the bias that shows up in journalistic work. Secondly, it aims to find solutions for curbing these biases in journalistic work through the key variable of _{awareness. According to} Rachlinski et al. (2009), if individuals are internally motivated to suppress their biases, they can make judgements free from them. Hence, the results of this study have important implications on

(5)

how journalists can be trained in order to maintain objectivity in journalism. By performing an experiment on practicing and forthcoming Indian journalists and their news decisions, this study aims to offer unique empirical data on the prevalence of implicit and journalistic gender biases and how the awareness of these biases can help control them. Thereby, this study answers the following research question: _{How does the awareness of their own implicit cognitive (gender)} biases affect journalists’ news decisions?

The Case of Gender Bias and India

Media imminently defines people’s ideology, behaviour and attitudes about various issues, including gender roles for men and women (Croteau & Hoynes, 2013). At the same time, since journalists are also a part of the same society, they are equally susceptible to societal ideology and characteristics. This idea becomes imperative to explore in societies that are traditionally characterised as being biased. India is a clear and prominent case, which has been investigated and pegged for gender-bias at every stage of a woman’s life (Rajan et. al, 2002). From female foeticide and infanticide, to denial of education and care to the girl child, a thick glass ceiling for women who do pursue a career, and deep insecurity in terms of rapes, sexual harrassment and violence (Yadav & Khanna 2014, Malhotra et. al, 1995, Vishwanath & Palakonda, 2011), women in India face inequality at every step of their lives.

While the media cannot be attributed for the prevalence of gender-bias in India, it is a proven reinforcer of the patriarchal ideology (Sharda, 2014). According to _{cultivation theory as} proposed by Gerbner (1984), mass media tend to strengthen and reinforce the prevailing ideas and attitudes in society rather than weakening them. Sharda (2014) elaborates on Gerbner’s cultivation theory in the Indian context, stating that through various processes like perpetuation

(6)

of inequalities, distorting image and echoing societal gender norms, the Indian media has become an influencer and contributor to the gender imbalance in the society. According to her, while the Indian media has immense capability of reversing gender stereotyping, it actually further strengthens it.

In such a scenario, where research has over and over again solidified the claim of

prevailing gender bias in Indian media (Patil, 2018, Sharda, 2014), what becomes pertinent is to find _{why the bias prevails, how it instrumentalises itself, and—most importantly—what can be} done to change it. While looking into the why and how question, this research also dives deep into the “_{what can be done”-quotient. Focusing on journalists, the prime producers of news} reports, the study will explore the need for journalists to be aware of their cognitive failures, so that they can consciously work on avoiding them. While the study focuses on gender bias in the Indian context, the results are relevant to journalists globally in terms of how they perform their work, how journalism education functions, and how mass media can spread information more objectively and responsibly.

Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses

Trumbo et. al (1998, p. 240) define cognitive biases as “a normal consequence of human cognition and happens without conscious intention to distort.” By highlighting the nature of cognitive bias is _{unintentional, this definition separates cognitive bias from the general usage of} the term “bias” which implies intentional malpractice. Stocking and Gross (1989, p. 4) define cognitive biases as “variety of ways of thinking that constrain one’s perceptions and

interpretations of the world” while pertinently adding that “people do not have to have any conscious intent to bias information; nor do they have to harbor an attitude or opinion to exhibit

(7)

these biases and errors” (Stocking & Gross, 1989, p. 4). Since these biases are implicit, people are not aware that they carry them. Their explicit behaviour can be completely unbiased, while harbouring biases implicitly (Stocking & Gross, 1989).

By the virtue of their watchdog nature, some researchers consider journalists as rational individuals who are constantly seeking information (Donsbach, 2004), who should not be prone to generic cognitive errors. Another reason journalists are considered to not fall prey to such implicit biases is because of the professional norms they are bound to (Boyer, 1981). Although, with a number of studies exposing ethics-bound-practitioners (e.g., surgeons and judges) for implicit and explicit biases, there is little reason to believe that moral _{codes inherently lead to} moral _{behaviour (Green et. al, 2007; Vidmar, 2011; Bennette, 2010). In fact, since different} environmental factors can affect the strength and value of cognitive biases (Stocking & Gross, 1989), the nature of journalistic work makes journalists more susceptible to these biases (Boscardin, 2015).

The nature of journalistic work where “journalists have to decide what is true, what is relevant and what is, in a moral sense, good or bad” (Donsbach, 2004, p.137) under serious time pressures, increases the probability of bias seeping in. Critical time pressures that journalists are subjected to can actually enhance the impact of these biases (Stocking & Gross 1989). Other than the time pressure, cognitive overload and stressful environments are considered catalysts that foster a conducive environment for implicit biases (Boscardin, 2015). Given the above evidence of journalistic environment fostering implicit biases, the researcher hypothesizes that:

H₁: _{Journalists will exhibit implicit biases in an implicit association gender-career bias} test.

(8)

Gender Bias

To examine the impact of implicit cognitive biases on journalists’ work, this study focuses on gender bias in journalism in the Indian context. Gender bias in media has been studied by various researchers, especially in the Western countries (Wood, 1994, Kinnick, 1998, Devitt, 2002). The discussion on the same has also resulted in change, especially in the U.K. where research projects at City University initiated policy reforms in bridging the gender gap in U.K. newsrooms (Patel, 2018). This increases the motivation of the primary investigator to carry out the current study in India, which is historically and perpetually challenged by sexism and patriarchy (Chakravarti, 1993).

Although, exploring gender bias in journalism poses a challenge. Since journalists in practice are bound by ethical standards designed to fight such biases, explicit gender bias is mostly not evident in journalism in obvious ways. Hence, in order to explore gender bias, researchers have predominantly applied two implicit criterion outlined by Clark (1972): first, “the quantitative presence of the group of interest”; and second, “respect, the treatment and status accorded to this group” (Kinnick, 1998, p. 214). Wood (1992) solidifies this investigation

framework and outlines three ways through which gender bias is operationalised in media

content. Firstly, women are underrepresented in media which solidifies the cultural norm of their unimportance and invisibility. Secondly, gender-normative stereotypes are applied on both men and women that correspond with the social expectations. Thirdly, relationships between men and women are depicted in a manner that re-establishes traditional gender roles. Wood’s third

criterion is an extension of the second criterion which showcases the pre-set notions used to impose societal roles upon women.

(9)

The criteria outlined above encapsulates the way in which gender imbalance takes form in journalism. Numerous studies in media research have found that men significantly outnumber women in representation in terms of sources used, coverage given (especially in science,

business and sports fields) and expert panel presence. In their large-scale study, Jia et. al (2016) analysed over 2.3 million articles by 950 news organisations globally and found that men were represented much more than women in both text and images in news pieces. In another research on Indian debate and opinion news shows, male panelists were found to outnumber women panelists by five times (Patil, 2018). A Reuters’s study also highlighted the complete absence and overhauling under-representation of women commentators on Indian primetime news debates (Patil, 2018).

In the Indian context, it has been argued that the gender imbalance in journalism is just a representation of the societal milieu and is not an outcome of a biased journalism industry. Although, scholars contend that the uneven media representation of men and women is not representative of the gender inequities in the society, but is actually an exacerbated version of it which artificially magnifies this inequality (Shor et al., 2015).

How journalism exacerbates and magnifies the inequality is discussed in the next three sections.

Selection Bias. _{The stark underrepresentation of women in the media can be explained}

through selection bias. Past studies have mostly focused on selection bias in terms of what stories make it in the news versus the ones that do not (McCarthy et al., 1996, Smith et al, 1997).

However, this bias is also evident in what sources journalists use for their stories, what panelists they invite to participate in primetime debates, and what expert commentators they highlight.

(10)

The nature of news doesn’t just involve which story is chosen over the other, but also which individuals are invited to add their perspective to them (Ross, 2007), . Most literature considers this bias to be an active one that journalists make intentionally and explain it through theories of agenda-setting and framing. In fact, Ross (2007, p. 449) in her study characterizes this source selection bias as “the sly deceit concealed within journalists’ use of sources” which they use as a way to convey their own beliefs and ideas.

While this active bias might be a part of the reason for underrepresentation of women in the news, it cannot be considered the only reason. Even when journalists believe that they are balanced and objective, they might unknowingly seek and select information that confirms their ideas and beliefs (Stocking & Gross, 1989). Patil (2017) resonates this view by mentioning that gender stereotypes don’t only impact gender roles for journalists but also the selection of

panelists in news debates and discussions. Similarly, Ross’ investigation (2007) of three regional UK newspapers finds that women are starkly underrepresented as sources in news stories. This source selection bias has been supported by numerous content analysis studies, like the Global Media Monitoring Project 2010 report, which showed that only 18% of women spokespersons were quoted on behalf of organisations in the Indian media in 2010 and only one out of five authoritative sources interviewed by journalists were women (Sharda, 2014).

Stereotypes. _{The underrepresentation of women as sources and experts is not the only}

way gender bias appears in journalism. Media researchers have also focused on

misrepresentation of women through the cognitive bias process of _{stereotyping. Donsbach} (2004) explains stereotypes as existing biases and attitudes, and concludes that by using

(11)

they produce. Christian (2013, p.162) solidifies the impact of stereotypes on news decisions by focusing on how categorisation “helps people store prior generalized knowledge that can serve as guides for subsequent similar interactions”. Stocking and Gross (1989) explain the _{process of} labelling _{as a tool used by journalists to explain ambiguous events leading to further perpetuation} of stereotypes.

In terms of gender bias, multiple studies especially in the field of sports and political journalism, expose the stereotypical manner in which women are presented in media. Past literature has pointed out that media focus much more on _{personal (i.e., not professional)} information in regard to family, clothing, personality and marital status for women than for men (Devitt, 2002). In a content analysis study of the coverage of _{U.S. 1998 gubernatorial election} campaigning, _{Devitt (2002) found evidence of newspapers paying more attention to women} candidates’ personal characteristics like clothes, age and personality over their policy stance. Furthermore, Whitlow (1977) found that male and female gatekeepers were prone to assigning gender-normative characteristics, including insecurity to women. The gender skew was also visible in the fact that women were more likely to be quoted in education and voluntary work sectors while men were quoted in stories relating to business, reiterating the caring and nurturing image of women while dissociating them from the business sector (Whitlow, 1977). Norris (1996) also found out that the American public’s view of economics and foreign policy being more a masculine field versus education and welfare being feminine fields was aligned with the American news coverage.

These stereotypes have strong implication on how women are perceived in the society. If news consumers are regularly exposed to the perception that women are excessively interested in

(12)

fashion, home, child care and other stereotypical feminine fields, this may inhibit women from venturing into male dominated fields like economics, sports, politics and business, reestablishing the perpetuating stereotypes (Desmond & Danilewicz, 2010).

Groupthink. _{Establishing that there is a clear bias against women in the media, the}

theory of Groupthink could then helps ascertain why these biases are still prevalent in

journalism. Janis (1972) defines groupthink as a “mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members' striving for unanimity overrides their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action” (p. 6). When explored further, groupthink can offer an explanation to the prevalence of gender bias in the journalism industry, which is both male dominated and has a strong glass ceiling (York, 2017).

In their research on homophily in journalism, Hanusch and Nölleke (2018) concluded that Australian male journalists predominantly interacted with other male journalists on Twitter while women too interacted more with their own gender, but the effect of this homophily was less for women when compared to men. The homophily is the basis of common thinking where like-minded individuals maintain preexisting beliefs and secure them by not socialising with people of differing characteristics. In case of gender, male journalists predominantly conversing with other male journalists inhibits them from comprehending viewpoints of the other gender, adding to the lack of understanding of women in general.

Contrarily, evidence points to women being less affected by groupthink and homophily as their stories are equally representative of both genders in terms of source selection, expert comments and even the content of the story (Devitt, 2002). According to a Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) report (2015), women reporters produce more stories with women

(13)

as central subjects compared to male journalists and that there is a statistically significant gender difference in source selection by female and male reporters. Moreover, studies have reported that women are more likely to quote other women in their stories and have significantly less gender framing bias in their work when compared to the work of their male counterparts (Artwick, 2013, Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996, Devitt, 2002).

So when compared, women tend to show less gender bias in their journalistic work than men. Hence, it could be argued that the prevalent gender bias in journalism could be a result of groupthink in newsrooms and male dominance of certain news beats. For instance, even though there are a significant number of women in the Indian media, their reportage is limited to gender issues, health and human rights, while men dominate sports, business, economics (International Federation of Journalists, 2015). In order to explore this, the study has to investigate whether women will make less gender biases decisions when compared to men by hypothesising that: H₂: _{Female journalists will produce less gender biased work compared to their male}

counterparts. A Possible Solution

Although these biases are implicit and automatic, research in psychology suggests ways through which humans can overcome them. While researching strategies for cognitive _debiasing, psychologists narrowed down the following stages of the process: “a state of lack of awareness of bias, to awareness, to the ability to detect bias, to considering a change, to deciding to change, then initiating strategies to accomplish change, and finally, maintaining the change” (Croskerry et. al, 2013, p. 65). Psychologists have reasons to believe that in order for people to get rid of their bias, they need to _{first be aware of it (Croskerry et. al, 2013).}

(14)

One of the strategies highlighted by psychologists for cognitive debiasing is educational strategy. According to researchers, education through awareness can help mitigate these biases (Croskerry et. al, 2013). Donsbach (2004) resonates this view by adding that journalists must be aware of their own cognitive influences in order to actively refute any mistakes from seeping into their work. Lasorsa and Dai (2007) also found strong support for automaticity of

stereotyping by demotivated reporters, characterised as too “lazy” to produce accurate stories compared to more aware and engaged journalists. Urging for introducing more awareness

strategies about their cognition failures, researchers stress on the need for journalists to be taught about their cognitive biases just like they are taught ethics, in order to make them aware so mistakes can be consciously avoided (Stocking & Gross, 1989, Christian, 2013, Trumbo et al., 2007). Explaining to journalists how their own minds work is a pertinent need of journalism pedagogy in the changing and challenging new atmosphere of journalism (Christian, 2013). Boscardin (2015) also highlights the need for increasing self-awareness in students’ curriculums as a concrete method towards reducing the effects of implicit bias. According to him, “inclusion of self-reflection exercises, including participation in implicit bias tests (IAT) as part of the curriculum (...) may improve self-awareness and self-monitoring” (Boscardin, 2015, p. 1726). By consciously acknowledging them, one can actively avoid implicit biases (Boscardin, 2015).

Therefore, based on past literature, the expectation is that journalists who are aware of their biases would be less susceptible to them as they would put more efforts into avoiding them.

H₃:_{Journalists aware of their cognitive biases will be less prone to making implicit bias} errors in their journalistic work compared to journalists who lack this awareness.

(15)

Method

A 2-between subjects experimental design was used for the multi-part study where the sample was randomised into two conditions. To investigate whether awareness of their implicit gender bias (independent variable) affects journalistic decision making (dependent variable), half of the sample was asked to complete a Gender-Career Implicit Association Test (IAT) followed by ten journalistic vignette tasks. Subject to the experimental design, the other half of the sample only participated in the journalistic vignette task of the study.

Sample description

A total of 100 Indian early career and future journalists were contacted for the study of which 81 participated (response rate: 81%). The sample was determined as early career (0-4 years) journalists and future journalists who had just wrapped up their journalism Master’s. This sample was ascertained in order to investigate the quality of journalism training in India. It was assumed that a sample with recent journalism training will be more aware of ethics and biases in journalism, since that’s what journalism institutions are expected to teach journalists. If this group of people performed badly on the bias test, it would also expectedly cover senior journalists who are supposedly even less aware of these biases, given them not receiving any recent training in the last five years or more.

The top Indian journalism institute Indian Institute of Mass Communication was contacted and most of the future journalist sample was recruited from there. The entire future journalist sample was about to join the workforce in various national newsrooms of the country. The working journalists were recruited through the researcher’s personal journalism network, which then snowballed into journalists referring their colleagues for the study. All of the working

(16)

journalists were full-time employees (i.e., no freelancers) working only in national English news organisations of all mediums (print, broadcast and radio). A majority of the sample was final year journalism students (74%) and the rest were full-time journalists. The sample consisted of 38 male and 43 female journalists. Majority of the sample (74%) was born and brought up in metropolitan cities of India while the rest came from smaller towns.

Research design

The sample was randomised into two conditions: The IAT group and the non-IAT group. The two conditions were divided by the independent variable of awareness of implicit bias, which the IAT group was subjected to and the non-IAT group was not subjected to. A randomization check showed that the sample did show a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, (χ2(1) =0.30, _{p = 0.582), age (χ2(1) =.72, p = 0.396),} students versus full-time journalists (χ2(1) =3.38, _{p = 0.066) and individuals from smaller versus} bigger cities (χ2(1) =.25, _{p = 0.851). Randomisation, thus, was successful.}

Half of the sample, primarily the student sample, performed the experiment in the premises of Indian Institute of Mass Communication with the primary investigator present. The rest of the sample, mainly the early career journalists, performed the experiment online, but with the PI present virtually through _{Skype at all times to ensure similarity of setting between the} physically present group and the online one.

The IAT group _{participated in the gender-career Implicit Association Test. In this test,} the participants were asked to categorize items into groups as fast as they could: The four groups being male, female, career and family using the I and the E keys on their keyboard (standard practice for IATs). In the seven part test, the participants were first asked to group these items in

(17)

gender-normative manner, that is, use the E key for male and career terms like Ben, John, briefcase, office, career salary and use the I key for female and family terms like Rebecca, Emily, Julia, marriage, wedding, relatives, home etc. In the later parts, the test reversed these groupings to the key E for male and family and key I for female and career. Depending on the time it took for people to make these associations in gender-normative manner versus

gender-incongruent manner ascertained whether an individual participants was biased or not. The group received the IAT results right after their test and were told whether they had implicit bias or not. Directly afterwards, they were asked to participate in the vignette part of the study.

The group that was _{not given the IAT was dealing with the condition of “unawareness”} of implicit gender bias. They immediately proceeded to the experimental vignette questionnaire which all participants took. This questionnaire involved ten vignettes characterising different forms of gender bias. Both groups were told that they were participating in an editorial efficiency study to avoid the social desirability quotient which surveys usually struggle with (Steiner et. al, 2016).

Operationalisation and Key Variables

The main aim of this study was to expose whether awareness of implicit gender bias plays a role in objective journalistic decision making. To do so, this study required

operationalization of two key variables – the awareness (or lack of awareness) of implicit gender bias (independent variable) and the journalistic decision making (dependent variable).

(18)

IAT and Awareness._{The IAT was developed by three scientists (Greenwald, Banaji,}

Nosek, 1998) and has been used to test implicit cognitive biases in a number of research fields. The IAT has not been applied on journalists to study their biases, given the lack of experiments performed directly on journalists. The IAT has been widely used by social psychologists especially because of its ease of use in investigating group bias (McConnell & Leibold, 2001). Studies have also emphasised the _{non-fakability factor of an IAT even on people who know what} they are being tested for; hence, avoiding the social desirability factor (_{Steffens, 2004). Since} this test has been used widely for two decades, it offers more validity than any other implicit cognitive bias measure, fitting the current experiment well.

The IAT was primarily used to operationalise the independent variable, which is

awareness of gender bias_{. This awareness was induced in the participants through taking the IAT} and being told their result. The computer-based test subjected the participants to the task of making quick associations between gender and career, this primed the IAT group in thinking about these gender based associations. _{As a manipulation check, a chi-square test of}

independence was performed to examine the relationship between taking the IAT test and awareness of implicit bias while performing journalistic tasks (yes _{vs. no). The relationship} between these variables was significant, χ²(1) = 12.79, _{p < .001. A significantly smaller}

proportion of the non-IAT group (67.5%) reported awareness of their implicit gender bias when compared to the IAT group (97.5%) almost all of whom indicated to be aware of their biases.

Dependent Variable

Journalistic Decision Making. _{The concept of gender bias in journalistic reporting was}

(19)

experiment used was the _{Policy capturing and conjoint analysis under which participants’}

implicit judgements were exposed by asking them to choose between various scenarios presented in true-to-life vignettes (Aguinis & Bradley, 2014). The policy capturing and conjoint analysis technique is the key method under EVM to analyse participants’ implicit behaviours, which captures real-time processes that the participants may not be conscious of (Aguinis & Bradley, 2014).

As discussed in the theoretical framework, gender bias majorly shows up in journalism through (a) underrepresentation of women as sources or as experts in specialised fields like science and business (selection bias), (b) through reiteration of stereotypical images of women, for examples as caregivers, or mothers, and (c) through imposition of gender norms

(stereotypes). _{By combining the variables ascertained in the literature review, the vignettes either} possessed gender bias by carrying stereotypical information in them (which the participants could choose to correct) or exhibited gender bias by asking respondents to select amongst options, exposing their awareness/unawareness of bias.

The vignettes in this experiment were designed as real life scenarios that journalists face in everyday work. The ten vignettes asked journalists to make common journalistic decisions, for example, select a panel expert or a lead source, edit a headline, or select a story angle. The vignettes were designed using real-life news reports that have been characterised as gender biased in previous content analysis studies. This helped bring a sense of reality to the whole experiment, a property that abstract survey questions normally lack (Steiner et. al, 2016). The real life reportage increased the experimental realism of the study and hence enhanced external validity (Aguinis & Bradley, 2014).

(20)

The vignettes were divided factorially, involving stereotypes as well as selection bias. According to the literature studied, there is a proven bias in source selection and expert

comments with favorability towards men (Shor et. al, 2015). Hence, to operationalise selection bias, in three out of ten vignettes, participants were asked to choose between two exact

candidates in terms of their professional credentials, with the only difference being their gender. The participants were able to identify gender by the names and the pronouns used in the fictive characters’ descriptions. _{The answers were transformed into dummy variables, with 0 indicating} no bias (choice for female source) and 1 indicating bias (choice for male source). _Topics

especially like politics, science, business and sports have been found sensitive for this bias (Kinnick, 1998, Devitt, 2002). Therefore, the selection scenarios were limited to these topics to garner a stronger effect.

For stereotypes, the literature has highlighted that news stories characterise women’s personality more than men’s and focus on their clothing over their career or work (Adhikari, 2014, Patil, 2018). Literature also suggests that women’s success is often attributed to their family and cultural support rather than their own work (Patil, 2018). These observations were used in making the vignettes for the stereotype factor. For instance, in seven out of ten vignettes, the participants were asked to edit stories that included gender stereotypes. Their decision to edit the stereotypes could expose whether they recognised these stereotypes and were willing to take action. Participants could also choose to _{not edit, if they felt that everything was fine.}

Depending on the structure of the vignette, whether and how the participant edited the story or whom they selected for lead source or panel expert decided their total bias score. _For example, a participant who edited a news copy discussing a female politician’s credentials solely

(21)

in terms of her pregnancy: “Pregnancy plays no part in the political capability” was given a score of 0, while another participant who edited the same copy with “while. - inspite - Circulating in the media” was given a 1 since the editing was not about the bias, but about the wording of the copy. The average intercoder reliability score (Cronbach’s Alpha) was .97. 1

The total score was calculated on a scale of 10, given the ten total vignettes which were weighted equally. A higher score indicated higher journalistic bias and a lower score indicated a lower bias. By adding the score of each of the participants performance on every vignette, a continuous total score variable was created which was then used to compare the two groups. The overall sample had a mean bias score of 5.84 (_{M = 5.84, SD = 2.25). By having ten different} vignette tasks in combination with the experimental structure, a nuanced and precise

measurement instrument was created to operationalize the bias journalists may show in their reporting. The full list of the questions is available in the appendix.

Results

Implicit Bias in Journalists._{There is a significant support for the first hypothesis which}

establishes that journalists inhibit implicit gender bias. 62.5% of the IAT group showed gender bias in their test results, which ascertained that the journalists do associate family with female and career with male more strongly than vice versa. The results, hence support the first hypothesis.

The Role of Gender. _{The second hypothesis predicted an association between gender of the}

(22)

show less gender bias in their journalistic work when compared to men. _{An independent-samples} t-test was conducted to compare the journalistic bias score (DV) and the gender of the journalist (IV). There was not a significant difference in the journalistic bias scores for the male journalists (_{M = 5.68, SD = 0.31) and the female journalists (M = 5.98, SD = 0.38) t(79) = 0.58, p = .562. A} Factorial ANOVA was conducted on the influence of this independent variables (gender)

together with the manipulated variable (taking the IAT) on the total journalistic bias score. The interaction effect was also non-significant, _{F(1, 77) = 2.95, p = .090. This hypothesis was not} supported.

On further inspection, when compared within groups, there was a marginally significant difference in the bias scores of men and women who were _{not given the IAT (control condition).} The men of the group dealing with the unawareness of the implicit gender bias scored _{less high} on their journalistic bias score (_{M=5.95, SD=1.35) whereas the women scored higher (M=7.15,} SD_{=2.00), t(4) = -2.21, p =.033. Yet, this difference is insignificant in the group which did get} the IAT and was made aware of implicit biases. Within the group made aware of their implicit bias, women on average scored the same as men (men: _{M=5.39, SD=2.47, women: M=4.96,} SD_{=2.45, t(39) = 0.55, p =.581) in the journalistic bias score. Post hoc tests using the Bonferroni} correction revealed that the relationship between gender and journalistic bias was insignificant for the IAT (unaware) group (_{p = .520), while the mean difference between the two genders of} unaware group was marginally significant (_{p = .079), with women scoring higher in journalistic} bias than men. Therefore, we can conclude that awareness of implicit biases elicits a marginally significant reduction in journalistic gender bias for women.

(23)

The Role of Awareness. _{The main hypothesis explored whether journalists who are made aware}

of their implicit gender biases will make less gender-biased journalistic decisions when

compared to the group unaware of their implicit biases. There is a support for Hypothesis 3 as it yielded a negative association (_{p = .004) between the condition participants were assigned to} (taking the IAT test or not) and biases in journalistic decision making. The journalists who were given the IAT before the vignette tasks—and hence made aware of their implicit gender

bias—scored significantly lower in their journalistic bias score.

Figure 1: The mean difference of the journalistic bias between the group aware implicit bias aware and unaware journalists.

An independent samples t-test showed that the IAT group’s total bias score was lower (_M = 5.15, _{SD = 2.44) than the group that was not made aware of their implicit gender bias (M =} 6.55, _{SD = 1.79), t(79) = -2.93, p = .004). Further, Cohen’s effect size value (d = .65) suggested} a moderate to high practical significance. Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis that there is no

(24)

difference in journalistic gender bias between the implicit bias aware group and the implicit bias unaware group.

Discussion

This study supports three conclusions. First, journalists, like most people, carry implicit gender biases. Second, contradictory to the theoretical expectation, these implicit biases are not affected by gender. Third, when journalists are aware of these implicit biases, they appear able to control and avoid them in their work.

While the first conclusion seems fairly obvious, it has not been tested in the past. _62.5% of the journalists in the IAT group showed gender bias in IAT test results, which ascertained that the journalists do associate family with female and career with male more strongly than vice versa. _{This result questions the normative value attached to journalists and journalism. Given the} ethical norms that journalists are bound to, they are expected to be objective and free of any biases (Boyer, 1981). Yet, given the percentage of journalists in the study who showed implicit bias in the gender-career IAT, a conclusion can be drawn that these professional norms and ethics have little impact on gender associations, at least on the journalists in this study. The implications of this result affect the way in which media researchers study journalism. According to Althaus (2012, p. 97), “normative assertions about media performance often appear as

throwaway lines in an empirical study’s concluding discussion or as preparatory throat-clearing before an empirical study is introduced.” No empirical research can truly add to an objective future of journalism if they are based on untested normative grounding. Thus, this study converts the _{normative assertions of journalists’ objectivity into a normative assessment by actually} testing them for bias instead of already assuming them to be bias-free. This study locates,

(25)

discloses and refines the normative assumptions of a ‘bias-free’ journalist, used by media researchers to justify the importance of their findings based on normative grounds (Althaus, 2012).

The second conclusion exposes the strength of the problem by disputing previous studies which claim that gender can impact journalistic gender bias. According to the literature, women were expected to show less gender bias in their journalistic work than men (_{Hanusch & Nölleke,} 2018, Devitt, 2002_{). However, the results of the current study are not in line with these findings.} Contrary to the theoretical assumption, the female journalists of the study were as biased in their journalistic decisions as the male journalists. While the researcher struggled to find explanations for gender not impacting bias in western media research, in context of India, it can be explained through the patriarchal nature of the society which both men and women are deeply immersed in (Ahmad et. al, 2004). This means that while women are the major victim of gender bias, they also seem to be complicit in it. Moreover, these results signify that journalists are susceptible to journalistic biases, despite their gender. Hence, basing on this study’s results, the _{only solution to} this bias then cannot be to fill up newsrooms with women and make them report in fields they are less represented in (business, sports, politics), something that prior research has suggested (Desmond & Danilewicz, 2010). So then, what is the solution?

Silver Lining.

The final result from the study offer a solution to this ethical drawback in journalistic decision making. The considerable difference between the journalistic bias scores of the group made aware of their implicit biases versus the unaware group, highlights the role of _{awareness in} inhibiting implicit biases from seeping into the journalist’s work. Journalists who were made

(26)

aware of their implicit gender bias made efforts to overcome them by actively taking them out of their journalistic work. Whereas, the unaware journalists seemed to overlook these biases more frequently and let them persist in their journalistic product.

In fact, even though there is no correlation between gender and journalistic gender bias in the overall sample, women in the IAT group, i.e., women who were made aware of their implicit gender biases, showed less journalistic bias when compared to the group of women who were not made aware of the bias. While even the “aware women” showed as much bias as the “aware men”, it was significantly less when compared to the bias exhibited by the “unaware women”. This result adds to our hypothesis of awareness being the key variable in decreasing journalistic gender bias.

Corresponding to the theory discussed and the empirical data presented, awareness seems to be the answer for avoiding journalistic gender bias. However, due to the negativity attached to the word ‘bias’, most people assert themselves as not biased and try to supress or not

acknowledge themselves as biased (Stocking & Gross, 1989). This is counterproductive as suppressing these biases can lead to an increase in their prevalence (Boscardin, 2015). It is necessary to acknowledge this implicit response since it is critical to objective decision making, especially for those whose work involves the principles of fairness and justice (Gladwell, 2005. Hence, in order to make journalists acknowledge these implicit responses to positively impact their decisions making, awareness must be introduced and reintroduced to journalists throughout their careers.

This awareness can be introduced through many methods, but most importantly, it needs to be embedded in journalism training throughout the journalist’s career. _{By including}

(27)

self-awareness exercises in journalism training and also awareness workshops in newsrooms, journalists can self monitor and remind themselves of these natural pitfalls they need to actively avoid. Studies have previously ascertained that a conscious acknowledgement of implicit biases can have a positive effect in curbing these biases rather than ignoring and suppressing them, which proves to be counterproductive (Boscardin, 2015). Adding IAT tests to curriculum and introducing explicit strategies like cognitive restructuring can reduce the stress of a busy newsroom and mitigate the bias from showing up in journalistic work (Boscardin, 2015). This repeated awareness induction is similar to keeping journalists on their toes regarding the content they produce, while also returning the journalistic agency that has been snatched from them with decades of research solely focused on organisational and environmental factors (Cottle, 2007). All in all, using empirical data, this study offers awareness as the key tool to fight gender bias in journalism.

Conclusion._{It is surprising that media researchers have rarely experimentally}

investigated the reasons for journalistic biases in the past. While there have been many studies explicating the presence of different types of bias in media reports, a thorough examination of the manifestation of the biases has been missing. This study aims to fill that gap by establishing a causal relationship between the gender bias and the variables that instrumentalise them. By pointing out unawareness of implicit bias as a cause of journalistic bias, this study advances techniques to bring more objectivity into journalism.

However, since the experiment used has been designed and applied just in this study, its reliability cannot be thoroughly established. While the researcher took measures to maintain both external and internal validity by drawing the experiment from previously established techniques,

(28)

not everything could possibly be controlled for. For example, the experiment could be impacted by the primary investigator’s own biases. In developing the experiment, what the PI considered to be gender biased, might be an objective way of reporting for the participants. Even though the PI controlled for this by using published news stories that were pegged for bias, it cannot be established that the participants saw them in the same light. Also, the sample was selected on the assumption that new journalists should be more aware of implicit biases given their recent journalism training. However, maybe senior journalists, by the virtue of working in the industry for longer, could be more critical of such biases than early career journalists.

These limitations also ascertain the need for future research and experiments to be carried out on journalists. With psychological studies now using neuroimaging (fMRI), skin

conductance and eye tracking tools to ascertain decision making, questions about implicit biases can be answered with more validity and less possibility of variance (Falk, 2013). For example, neuroimaging has been credited to “predict outcomes that are difficult to predict when relying on self-report alone” (Falk, 2013, p. 80). These new measures can hence be the solution to the limitations posed by self-report measures like survey and focus groups. Also, just like awareness has been highlighted in this study as a solution for curbing journalistic bias, maybe other factors such as egalitarianism, IQ, political sophistication etc. can also be examined as factors that could abate or intensify bias.

Nevertheless, despite the limitations, this study exposes the good, bad and the ugly of implicit gender biases in journalists. While it pinpoints the prevalence of both implicit and journalistic gender bias in journalists, it also ascertains the concrete potential of washing these

(29)

biases out of journalistic products. The results indicate motivation in journalists to consciously avoid gender bias once they are made aware of the existence of this implicit gender bias.

To limit gender bias from journalistic content, this study offers a number of reforms in terms of awareness creation in journalists throughout their career. Given the impact of journalism on the society, especially in terms of gender and patriarchy in India, these measures can help establish the expected objectivity in news media. With the faith in journalism and the social structure of the Indian society dependent on the removal of these biases, these solutions ought to be considered.

(30)

References

Aguinis, H., & Bradley, K. J. (2014). Best Practice Recommendations for Designing and

Implementing Experimental Vignette Methodology Studies. _{Organizational Research} Methods_{. doi:10.1177/1094428114547952}

Ahmad, F., Riaz, S., Barata, P., & Stewart, D. E. (2004). Patriarchal beliefs and perceptions of abuse among South Asian immigrant women. _{Violence Against Women, 10(3),} 262-282. doi:10.1177/1077801203256000

Althaus, S. L. (2012). What’s good and bad in political communication research? Normative standards for evaluating media and citizen performance. _{The SAGE handbook of} political communication_{, 97-112.}

Artwick, C. G. (2013). Reporters on Twitter: Product or service?. _{Digital Journalism, 1(2),} 212-228. doi:10.1080/21670811.2012.744555

Bakker, B.N., Rooduijn, M., & Schumacher, G. (2016). The psychological roots of populist voting: Evidence from the United States, the Netherlands and Germany. _European Journal of Political Research_{, 55(2), 302–320. doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12121}

Bennett, M. W. (2010). Unraveling the Gordian knot of implicit bias in jury selection: The problems of judge-dominated voir dire, the failed promise of Batson, and proposed solutions. _{Harv. L. & Pol'y Rev., 4, 149.}

Boscardin, C. K. (2015). Reducing Implicit Bias Through Curricular Interventions. _{Journal of} General Internal Medicine_{. doi:10.1007/s11606-015-3496-y}

(31)

Boyer, J. H. (1981). How editors view objectivity. _{Journalism Quarterly, 58(1), 24-28.}

Caprara, G.V., & Zimbardo, P.G. (2004). Personalizing politics. A congruency model of political preference. _{The American Psychologist, 59(7),581-594.}

doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.7.581

Chakravarti, U. (1993). Conceptualising brahmanical patriarchy in early India: Gender, caste, class and state. _{Economic and Political Weekly, 579-585.}

Christian, S. (2013) Cognitive Biases and Errors as Cause—and Journalistic Best Practices as Effect. _{Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 28 (3), pp 160-174,}

doi:10.1080/08900523.2013.794674

Cottle, S. (n.d.). Ethnography and News Production: New(s) Developments in the Field. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00002.x

Croskerry, P., Singhal, G., & Mamede, S. (2013). Cognitive debiasing 2: impediments to and strategies for change. _{BMJ Qual Saf, bmjqs-2012. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2012-00171}

Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (2013). Media/society: Industries, images, and audiences. _Sage Publications_.

De Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., & Dolan, R.J. (2006). Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in the human brain. _{Science, 313 (5787), 684-687.}

(32)

Desmond, R., & Danilewicz, A. (2010). Women are on, but not in, the news: Gender roles in local television news. _{Sex Roles. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9686-5}

Devitt, J. (2002). Framing gender on the campaign trail: Female gubernatorial candidates and the press. _{Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79(2), 445-463.}

doi:10.1177/107769900207900212

Domingo, D. (2008). Interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms: Dealing with an uncomfortable myth. _{Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(3),} 680-704. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00415.x

Donsbach, W. (2004). Psychology of news decisions Factors behind journalists’ professional behavior. _{SAGE Publications, 5(2), pp 131–157.}

doi:1464-8849(200405)5:2;131–157;041658

Entman, R. M. (2004). _{Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign} policy_{. University of Chicago Press.}

Falk, E. B. (2013). Can neuroscience advance our understanding of core questions in Communication Studies? An overview of Communication Neuroscience. Communication@the Center_{, 77-94.}

Gerbner, G. (1984). Political functions of television viewing: A cultivation analysis. In Cultural indicators: An international symposium. Vienna: Akademie der Wissenschaften_.

(33)

Gladwell, M. (2007). _{Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. Back Bay Books.}

Global Media Monitoring Project. (2015). _{Country Reports. Retrieved from:}

http://whomakesthenews.org/gmmp-2015

Green, A. R., Carney, D. R., Pallin, D. J., Ngo, L. H., Raymond, K. L., Iezzoni, L. I., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for black and white patients. _{Journal of general internal} medicine_{, 22(9), 1231-1238. doi:10.1007%2Fs11606-007-0258-5}

Hanusch, F., & Nölleke, D. (2018). Journalistic Homophily on Social Media. _{Digital Journalism.} doi:10.1080/21670811.2018.1436977

Helfer, L., & Van Aelst, P. (2015). What makes party messages fit for reporting? An

experimental study of journalistic news selection. _{Political Communication, 1-19.} doi:10.1080/10584609.2014.969464

Hilgartner, S., & Bosk, C. L. (1988). The rise and fall of social problems: a public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology_{, 94(1), 53-78. doi:10.1086/228951}

Iyengar, S., & Simon, A. (1993). News coverage of the Gulf crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda-setting, priming, and framing. _{Communication research, 20(3), 365-383.} doi:10.1177/009365093020003002

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: a psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes.

(34)

Jia, S., Lansdall-Welfare, T., Sudhahar, S., Carter, C., & Cristianini, N. (2016). Women are seen more than heard in online newspapers. _{PLoS ONE.}

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148434

Kinnick, K. N. (1998). Gender Bias in Newspaper Profiles of 1996 Olympic Athletes: A Content Analysis of Five Major Dailies. _{Women’s Studies in Communication.} doi:10.1080/07491409.1998.10162557

Lasorsa, D., Dai. J. (2007). When News Reporters Deceive: The Production of Stereotypes, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly_{. 84(2). pp. 281 - 298.}

doi:10.1177/107769900708400206

Malhotra, A., Vanneman, R., & Kishor, S. (1995). Fertility, dimensions of patriarchy, and development in India. Population and development review, 281-305.

doi:10.2307/2137495

Matusitz, J. & Breen, G (2012) An Examination of Pack Journalism as a Form of Groupthink: A Theoretical and Qualitative Analysis, _{Journal of Human Behavior in the Social} Environment_{, 22(7), 896-915, doi:10.1080/10911359.2012.707933}

McCarthy, J. D., McPhail, C., & Smith, J. (1996). Images of protest: Dimensions of selection bias in media coverage of Washington demonstrations, 1982 and 1991. _American sociological review_{, 478-499. doi:10.2307/2096360}

(35)

McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. _{Journal of} experimental Social psychology_{, 37(5), 435-442. doi:10.1006/jesp.2000.1470}

McManus, J. (1995). A market-based model of news production. _{Communication Theory,} 5(4), 301-338. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1995.tb00113.x

Nicolaou, A., Giles, C. (2017, January 16). Public trust in media at all time low, research shows. _{Financial Times. Retrieved from}

https://www.ft.com/content/fa332f58-d9bf-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

Norris, P. (1996). Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. _{PS: Political} Science & Politics_{, 29(3), 474-480. doi:10.2307/420827}

Patil, R. (2018). Breaking news and missing views. _{University of Oxford, 1(2), 1-17.}

Pavlik, J. V. (2013). Innovation and the Future of Journalism. _{Digital journalism, 1(2),} 181-193. doi:10.1080/21670811.2012.756666

Rachlinski, J. J., Johnson, S. L., Wistrich, A. J., & Guthrie, C. (2008). Does unconscious racial bias affect trial judges. _{Notre Dame L. Rev., 84, 1195. doi:10.2139/ssrn.999490}

Rajan, S. I., Sudha, S., & Mohanachandran, P. (2000). Fertility decline and worsening gender bias in India: Is Kerala no longer an exception?. _{Development and Change, 31(5),} 1085-1092. doi:10.1111/1467-7660.00190

(36)

Reese, S. D., & Shoemaker, P. J. (2016). A media sociology for the networked public sphere: The hierarchy of influences model. _{Mass Communication and Society, 19(4),} 389-410. doi:10.1080/15205436.2016.1174268

Ross, K. (2007). The journalist, the housewife, the citizen and the press: Women and men as sources in local news narratives. _{Journalism. doi:10.1177/1464884907078659}

Ryfe, D.M. (2009). Broader and deeper: A study of newsroom culture in a time of change. Journalism_{, 10(2), 197-216, doi:10.1177/1464884908100601}

Sabin, J. A., Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Rivara, F. P. (2009). Physicians’ Implicit and Explicit Attitudes About Race by MD Race, Ethnicity, and Gender. _{Journal of} Health Care for the Poor and Underserved_{, 20(3), 896–913. doi:10.1353/hpu.0.0185}

Schuck Andreas, R. T., Rens, V., & de Vreese Claes, H. (2014). Who's Afraid of Conflict? The Mobilizing Effect of Conflict Framing in Campaign News. _{British Journal of} Political Science. http://dx. doi. org/10.1017 S_.

Sharda, A. (2014). Media and gender stereotyping: The need for media literacy. _{International} Research Journal of Social Sciences_{, 3(8), 43-49.}

Shor, E., van de Rijt, A., Miltsov, A., Kulkarni, V., & Skiena, S. (2015). A Paper Ceiling: Explaining the Persistent Underrepresentation of Women in Printed News. _American Sociological Review_{. doi:10.1177/0003122415596999}

(37)

Smith, K. B. (1997). When all’s fair: Signs of parity in media coverage of female candidates. Political Communication_{. doi:10.1080/105846097199542}

Steffens, M. C. (2004). Is the implicit association test immune to faking? _Experimental psychology_{, 51(3), 165-179. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.51.3.165}

Steffens, M. C. (2004). Is the implicit association test immune to faking?. _Experimental psychology_{, 51(3), 165-179. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.51.3.165}

Steiner, P. M., Atzmüller, C., & Su, D. (2016). Designing Valid and Reliable Vignette Experiments for Survey Research: A Case Study on the Fair Gender Income Gap. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences_{, 7(2), 52–94.}

Stocking, S. Gross, H. (1989) _{How Do Journalists Think? A Proposal for the Study of Cognitive} Bias in Newsmaking._{Bloomington: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and}

Communication Skills

Trumbo, W., Dunwoody, S. Griffin, R. (1998). Journalists, Cognition, and the Presentation of an Epidemiologic Study. _{Science Communication, 19 (3), pp 238 - 265,}

doi:10.1177/107554709801900300

Van Aelst & Vliegenthart (2013). Studying the tango. An analysis of parliamentary questions and press coverage in the Netherlands. _{Journalism studies 15(4), 392- 410.}

doi:10.1080/1461670X.2013.831228

Vidmar, N. (2011). The psychology of trial judging. _{Current Directions in Psychological} Science_{. doi:10.1177/0963721410397283}

(38)

Vishwanath, J., & Palakonda, S. C. (2011). Patriarchal ideology of honour and honour crimes in India. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 6(1/2), 386.

Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1996). _{The American journalist in the 1990s: US news} people at the end of an era_{. Psychology Press.}

Whitlow, S. S. (1977). How male and female gatekeepers respond to news stories of women. Journalism Quarterly_{, 54(3), 573-609. doi:10.1177/107769907705400318}

Wood, J. T. (1994). Gendered media: The influence of media on views of gender. _Gendered lives: Communication, gender and culture_{, 231-244.}

Yadav, R. & Khanna, A. (2014). Existence of Glass Ceiling in India. _{Research Journal of} Indian Cultural, Social & Philosophical stream_{. 142-148.}

York, A., (2017, September 18). Women dominate journalism schools, but newsrooms are still a different story. _{Poynter. Retrieved from}

https://www.poynter.org/news/women-dominate-journalism-schools-newsrooms-are -still-different-story

(39)

Appendix - Material: Vignette questionnaire and scoring:

1. On a busy day, you have the time to cover only one lecture at the science conference for your newspaper. The editor has asked you to make the decision. On the basis of the following conference briefs, which conference will you choose to attend and write about? 2

A- Blockchains have been the buzzword in the media and the technology sector for a while, but what will be the repercussions of this technology on the lives of ordinary people. Dr Radha Chaturvedi, a Blockchain specialist, discusses the impact of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency on people’s daily lives while giving an overview of the concept.

B- Are blockchains overrated? Dr Sandip Gupta will share his expertise on blockchains and cryptocurrency and breakdown the future of this technology in day-to-day lives of people. Using his expertise, he will explain the concept and the dynamics of the new technology.

2. During the busy election time, another news copy discussing party candidates and their strengths and weaknesses hits your desk. Keeping the time quotient in mind, edit this copy (if it needs it) as quickly as you can.

Nischay Yadav, while having a strong political family background has not been able to prove his grit given his lack of experience in politics when compared to his opponent, Sugandha Apte, and has little economic policy experience which might set him back. On the other hand, news of her pregnancy circulating the media could hurt Sugandha’s chances of winning this race. Not just

2_{The names in the options of this question was randomised. That is, while the description for option a and b}

remained same, some participants were presented with Dr Radha Chaturvedi in description A and with Dr Sandip Gupta in option A. This was done to ensure that any other variable than gender in the given data does not influence

(40)

her pregnancy rumours, but also questions about her non-political family background make her a weak candidate in the race.

With elections only a few weeks from now, the polls are not showing much information to form predictions on. While the electorate has previously supported the Yadav family, continuing their lineage in the district for the past_{seven elections, with poor economic conditions, a wind of} change is observed in the air.

A- Yes, I will make the following changes: B- No, I won’t make changes

3. Wipro’s stocks have dropped by 12 percent given the recent scandal on trading confidential financial information with outside parties. Your story needs a quote from a company representative in order for it to be complete. These are the following two options:

A- Deepa Trehan, PR Associate: The company is currently investigating the matter to find out who’s responsible for the leak. Actions are being taken to restore the stock value.

B- Ratul Chowdhury, PR Associate: The company is currently investigating the leak and trying to find out the responsible party. We are also working towards restoring the stock value.

4. You receive a press piece about Barkha Nair, who is using strategy and her position as the head of a Multinational Company to bring attention to the cause of

environment and sustainability. The reporter under you has headlined and tagged the story as mentioned below. As the editor, you have the freedom to change or edit anything in the copy or you can run it as written by the reporter.

HL: Bringing change through compassion

(41)

A- Yes, I will make changes the following changes: B- No, I won't make any changes

5. You are interviewing the captain of the Indian Women Cricket Team, Mithali Raj for a profile article and due to time pressure, you can only ask her one question. Which questions will you include? You can justify your reasons in the open space.

A- It is said that you are the Tendulkar of Women Cricket. Would you agree?

B- For someone who emphasises so much on training, how do you draw the line between training and overtraining?

C- Was taking up cricket difficult as a woman?

D- How do you balance your batting and your captaincy?

6- As a sub-editor working at the Times of India’s sports desk, this is the opening of the last copy you have to edit for the day. It is a narrative style profile of an Olympic gold medalist. Would you be making changes to this headline and the story? If yes, then what changes would you make?

HL: The making of a golden girl: Radhika Jamwal and her mother Aarti on how they support each other.