Barriers to Career Success for Minority Researchers in the Behavioral Sciences

Abstract

The United States falls short in the diversity of its scientific workforce. While the underrepresentation of minority researchers in the behavioral sciences has been a concern for several decades, policy and training initiatives have been only marginally successful in increasing their number. Diversity plays a critical role in our nation’s capacity for research and innovation, yet current approaches prove inadequate. The current study used a qualitative approach to investigate the institutional, cultural, skills, and personal career barriers faced by minority researchers in the behavioral sciences. Data were collected from a select group of minority researchers (defined for this study as women and/or people of color) who attended a 3-and-one-half-day intensive workshop developed specifically to address career barriers. Seventy-two percent (n = 43) encountered workplace barriers relating to race/ethnicity; 26% reported barriers related to gender. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

Keywords

career barriers cross-cultural/multicultural career issues qualitative methods career counseling gender

The United States falls short in the diversity of its scientific workforce. Improving the pipeline from early career to independent scientist for minority researchers is vital for the nation’s economic well-being. According to a report by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the underrepresentation of minorities in the behavioral science research force has implications for the nation’s overall health (NIMH, 2001). Similarly, a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) highlights the critical role a diverse science and engineering workforce plays in sustaining the nation’s capacity for research and innovation (NAS, 2007). Career transition points such as obtaining independent funding can be difficult to navigate for minority researchers, who are also faced with barriers specifically related to their minority status (Harley, 2008). For example, a recent National Institutes of Health (NIH)-commissioned study found that racial/ethnic minority researchers are significantly less likely than White researchers to receive NIH funding (Ginther et al., 2011). In spite of the fact that the underrepresentation of people of color and women in research has been a concern for several decades, policy and training initiatives have been only marginally successful in increasing minority rates of graduation in psychology fields (Maton, Kohout, Wicherski, Leary, & Vinokurov, 2006). Gender stratification in the workplace is another issue that impedes career development, and research has captured the discriminatory experiences of racial minority and majority (White) women alike (Ortiz & Roscigno, 2009). Women lag far behind their male counterparts in research-intensive medical schools (Leboy & Madden, 2012) and do not hold as many advanced leadership roles in science fields as do men (NSF, 2011).

Understanding and eliminating barriers to successful careers in the behavioral sciences is an important aspect of establishing and maintaining a diverse workforce. The goal of this article is to examine barriers to career success in the behavioral sciences for ethnic/racial minority and women researchers, focusing on four broad categories of career barriers—institutional, cultural, skills, and personal. The importance of addressing these barriers is discussed and implications for career counselors are highlighted.

Institutional Barriers

Barriers resulting from institution-level practices and norms can stifle career success among underrepresented groups. Though many educational institutions formally declare diversity as a value, informal practices and policies may operate in ways that serve to maintain existing power structures and exclude the contributions of historically oppressed groups (Grant, Hansman, Jackson, & Spencer, 1999). Institutions vary greatly in terms of their diversity climates, though research shows that institution-level efforts to support diversity are related indirectly to rates of turnover among racial/ethnic minority employees (Triana, Garcia, & Colella, 2010). Racial and gender disparities in faculty promotion and tenure practices remain a cause for concern in academia (Fang, Moy, Colburn, & Hurley, 2000).

Examples of institutional barriers to career success for researchers of color include inadequate research infrastructure, insufficient training and development, and other social, cultural, and environmental barriers (Shavers et al., 2005). Jackson (2008) discusses barriers such as poor departmental support for faculty of color, low investment, ineffective recruitment and retention of faculty of color, and lack of mentoring. Jeste and colleagues (2009) note that “informal mentoring” may not provide the support that early career researchers often need. The scarcity of established minority researchers to act as mentors to new researchers becomes a self-perpetuating cycle; lack of support and career advancement opportunities can lead minority researchers to leave their profession out of dissatisfaction and frustration (Palepu, Carr, Friedman, Ash, & Moskowitz, 2000). Further, many of the policies undergirding the recruitment of faculty and the workplace environment in the science and engineering fields were adopted and codified when the workforce was more homogenous. These policies, both explicitly and implicitly, can create bias that works against women and minority scientists (NAS, 2007), in part by bolstering subtle, long-held assumptions that, ultimately, drive behavior when it comes to hiring and promotion.

Cultural Barriers

Cultural barriers are those that relate to insensitivity, misperceptions, and miscommunication regarding a researcher’s gender or ethnic background. According to a recent Yale research study reported in The New York Times, women in science programs at American universities face bias from men and, interestingly, from women as well. Female students were seen as less competent than their male counterparts, and professors—both male and female—were less likely to consider female students for either mentoring or employment. In cases where women were offered a job, their salary range was lower than salaries offered to male peers (Chang, 2012). A National Science Foundation (NSF) study finds that White males continue to dominate the science and engineering workforce by wide margins. As the researchers note, “unemployment rates are higher for minority scientists and engineers than for white scientists and engineers and are higher for minority female than for minority male scientists and engineers” (NSF, 2011, p. 7). In fact, minority women account for fewer than 1 in 10 employed scientists and engineers. And those who are employed are far less likely than their male counterparts to receive federal grants or contracts (NSF, 2011). Further, minority representation lessens the higher up the tenure track or academic leadership ladder, and minority women, not surprisingly, are least likely to be in tenure-track positions, behind men of any racial group (NAS, 2007).

Several cultural barriers relate specifically to the experiences of racial/ethnic minorities in science fields, including tokenism, typecasting, and minimizing minority-focused research. Being the only member of a minority group in a department (tokenism) can make many faculty of color feel a need to continually prove themselves among their colleagues (who may have the misperception that minority faculty are hired only because of their race and are therefore less qualified; Jackson, 2008). In addition, minority researchers often struggle against an inequity of perception: Their work must be of a quality far above their majority colleagues and they must work twice as hard to achieve the same level of legitimacy, respect, and consideration for funding (NSF, 2000; Vasquez et al., 2006). Being an “N of 1” also can place unfair or unrealistic expectations on someone to represent his or her entire racial/ethnic group. The assumption that a person of color speaks for his or her entire race or ethnic community has been noted in several studies (Niemann & Dovidio, 1998; Turner, González, & Wood, 2008; Vasquez et al., 2006).

Typecasting is the view that faculty of color are better suited to teach courses or direct research related to race and ethnicity, therefore minimizing their academic freedom (Jackson, 2008). For those researchers who do choose to study minority issues, they can find that their areas of interest and methodologies are unappreciated or dismissed by journals, professional groups, and funding organizations as well as by their own colleagues (Turner et al., 2008). One researcher in Vasquez et al. (2006) tells of the response from a White administrator when she inquired about applying for awards: “He said that I needed to do something credible to be considered for an award” (p. 160). Another administrator asked whether she “would be doing ‘real research,’ [meaning] research without a multicultural emphasis” (p. 160). Not only do these examples underscore the lack of cultural sensitivity faced by some researchers of color, they also set the stage for consideration of the impact that such interactions can have on an individual’s sense of self and overall well-being.

A troubling barrier faced by African American researchers is the lower likelihood of being awarded research project grants from the NIH. Recent data show that African American applicants were 10 percentage points less likely to receive investigator-initiated research grants, even when controlling for background characteristics such as publication record and training (Ginther et al., 2011). Tabak and Collins (2011) suggest this lower rate of funding for African American scholars reflects biases that are “insidiously interwoven into the basic fabric of the merit/reward system of science” (p. 940). There is emerging evidence on the ways in which institutionalized racism and discriminatory practices relate to career opportunities as well as to everyday workplace experiences for people of color (Deitch et al., 2003), yet there is no clear understanding of how these factors function as barriers to the successful navigation of career pathways, particularly in the behavioral sciences. Recent studies show that the scientific workforce is in decline (National Research Council, 2005; Sung et al., 2003); efforts to understand and eliminate career barriers for minority researchers will promote a stronger and more competitive scientific workforce that will benefit the nation as a whole.

Personal and Skills Barriers

Individual-level characteristics or situations can also impose challenges to career success. These include family situations, personality characteristics, availability of social support, and the ability to balance research, teaching, and clinical duties along with other responsibilities (Reynolds et al., 2007). Individuals also vary in terms of their training in specific skills associated with success in research careers, such as training in research methods, understanding the grant submission process, and knowing how to navigate the research culture at a particular institution (Jeste, Twamley, Cardenas, Lebowitz, & Reynolds, 2009; Shavers et al., 2005). Personal and skills barriers are challenges for all researchers, particularly in early years, and can be detrimental to career success.

In addition to more generally experienced personal and skills barriers, minority researchers in the sciences face a number of additional stressors that can erode career success and have a deleterious effect on mental and physical health (Pearlin, Schieman, Fazio, & Meersman, 2005). One such stressor is the pressure and insecurity that can arise from being a first-generation academician. Many racial/ethnic minority researchers struggle with being the first in their family to achieve an advanced education. This first-generation effect often manifests itself in an absence of social support from family and friends (Vasquez et al., 2006). This lack of social support combined with everyday interactions involving unsupportive or insensitive colleagues may result in feelings of isolation (Nagle, 2010). Minority researchers may also struggle with the feeling that education leads to assimilation and a loss of connection to their culture of origin (Nagle, 2010). Moreover, researchers from underrepresented groups may come from families with lower socioeconomic status and financial assets and may incur substantial debt while simultaneously bearing the responsibility of supporting their (sometimes extended) families (Jeste et al., 2009). Cultural conflict can play such a strong role in impeding one’s career trajectory that career counseling journals consider a familiarity with specific cultural values of the various ethnic/minority groups as indispensable to effective advising (Flores & Heppner, 2002; Flores, Ramos, & Kanagui, 2010).

The availability of skilled mentors is an important way to alleviate personal and skill barriers for minority researchers. Skilled mentors can offer guidance on building a career in the sciences as well as provide concrete instruction (e.g., training on research methods, grant writing, and running a lab), offer advice on circumventing potential stumbling blocks (e.g., navigating departmental politics, acclimating to academic culture, and balancing work and home life), and provide emotional support and advocacy (Reynolds et al., 2007). Vestal-Dowdy (in Vasquez et al., 2006, p. 168) notes that the small number of minority faculty members in her graduate department meant that there were “few persons I could identify as professional role models.” Ethnic “match” is not a prerequisite for a successful mentor–mentee relationship, but evidence suggests having a similar other who is invested and interested in the career success of junior researchers can be especially important. Mentoring is a protective factor for promoting success among minority researchers and is an important aspect of building a diverse scientific workforce.

The Present Study

Though there has been a concerted effort to promote diversity in the scientific workforce, barriers to career success for racial/ethnic minorities and for women remain an issue. Using a qualitative research framework and based on data from an innovative experiential workshop, the present study examines barriers to career success for minority researchers in the behavioral sciences. The Leadership Training Institute (LTI; http://lti.4researchers.org) was an NIH-funded workshop focused on career advancement for scholars from diverse backgrounds. Data from this workshop provide a unique insight into challenges that inhibit career success for minority researchers. Qualitative perspectives on this issue complement quantitative approaches that have been used to examine differences in career-related milestones for minority researchers such as obtaining federal funding (Ginther et al., 2011). Implications for career counselors are discussed.

Method

Participants

Participants in the current study were a subset of participants from a larger study examining the effectiveness of the LTI (http://lti.4researchers.org), an intensive, 3-day training program designed to provide knowledge and support for career advancement of diverse researchers (defined as women and/or persons of color). Potential participants were recruited via faculty referral and advertisements on relevant listservs (e.g., Society for Research in Child Development member list). Acceptance into the LTI was a highly selective process; prospective applicants were required to demonstrate a strong commitment to research through their curriculum vitaes, letters of recommendation, and a written statement describing their interest in advancing their career and willingness to address barriers to success. The creation and implementation of the LTI was dependent on involvement and input from minority researchers (see McMillen, Davis, DeRosier, Greenblatt, & Huffman, 2010 for details). Individuals interested in participating in the LTI effectiveness trial submitted an application that was reviewed by project staff to determine eligibility using the following requirements: (a) person of color and/or female; (b) researcher in a social, behavioral, or mental health field; and (c) early- or mid-career professional (e.g., advanced postdoctoral position, assistant or associate professor). Over 160 researchers applied to participate in the LTI effectiveness trial, of which 122 met all eligibility criteria. From these 122 eligible applicants, 50 were selected as participants in order to attain the following sample goals: (a) geographic representation across the United States, (b) significant diversity across participants (ethnicity, race, gender, scientific interests), and (c) demonstrated high level of commitment to a research career. One person withdrew prior to study initiation, resulting in a total sample of 49. Participants in the LTI effectiveness study were 79% female and represented diverse racial/ethnic groups (43% Black/African American, 17% Asian, 7% American Indian/Alaska Native, and 33% White; with 24% of participants reporting Hispanic/Latino heritage). Participants represented a broad array of research fields (e.g., social work, psychology, psychiatry, medicine, education). For more in-depth information regarding the LTI effectiveness study methods, see DeRosier, McMillen, Davis, Kameny, and Hoffend (2011).

For the present study, a subset of the 49 participants was included in data analyses. Membership in the subset was determined by excluding participants from the original data set who chose “White” as the descriptor for the demographic question regarding race. This resulted in a final set of 43 participants for the present study (77% female; 58% Black/African American, 16% Asian, 7% American Indian/Alaska Native, 5% multiracial; 14% Hispanic/Latino). Regional divisions proposed by the U.S. Census Bureau were used to determine the geographical distribution of the participants. Of the 40 participants for whom demographic data were available, 28% were from the Northeast, 38% were from the South, 17% were from the Midwest, 15% were from the West, and one was from Puerto Rico. Fifty-two percent were early career researchers, 48% were mid-career level. The majority of participants were in their 30s or 40s (38% between 31 and 40; 41% between 41 and 50 years old). Thirteen percent of participants were in the 51–60 age range and 8% were in the 20–30 age range.

Materials and Procedures

Participants were sent a secure login and password, and a unique URL to access an online questionnaire. After signing the consent form, participants completed the questionnaire assessing their career progress prior to attending the LTI. The barriers component (the focus of the current study) asked the following open-ended questions: (a) what professional barriers to your career progress have you encountered? (b) what personal barriers to your career progress have you encountered? (c) to what degree have you encountered barriers to your career progress due to your gender? and (d) to what degree have you encountered barriers to your career progress due to your race or ethnicity?

Coding process

This study used descriptive coding, in which the researcher relies primarily on the participants’ words themselves for meaning and avoids behind-the-scene interpretation (Miles & Huberman, 1994). We began with a start list of codes, based on a review of the literature and on the terms used in the questionnaire. The code list was not static; rather, it was “held lightly” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 58) and revised as needed while examining the data. The unit of analysis was the response that the participant gave for the prompt. When participants responded with several barriers, each barrier was coded separately.

The original start list of codes was professional, personal, gender, and race; this list changed as we reviewed the data. Code revision is typical of qualitative analysis. Some codes do not fit the empirical data; others need refining (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The following revisions were made: professional was renamed institutional to better reflect the level at which change would need to be made in order to alleviate barriers; skills was added as a new code, because many participants listed lack of research and other skills as barriers to career advancement. Gender and race/ethnicity were merged and renamed cultural. Personal was retained in its original form. Final operational definitions of the barrier categories were formed:

Institutional barriers: Barriers relating to the work environment; not directly related to race, gender, or age; likely true for majority of people in department, not just a subgroup.

Cultural barriers: Barriers relating to work environment but for a minority of people; specific to a subgroup (age, race, gender).

Personal barriers: Barriers relating to intrinsic/personality issues or individual situations; internal conflict relating to one’s background.

Skills barriers: Barriers relating to career advancement skills; can be improved with training.

When all barriers listed by participants were coded under one of these main barriers categories, we developed subcodes under each category that provided us with a more in-depth understanding of the career barriers faced by minority researchers (e.g., poor leadership [institutional], lack of diverse mentors [cultural], time management [skills], and emotional fatigue [personal]). The complete list of codes and their subcodes can be seen in Table 1.

Table 1.

Categories and Codes for Barriers to Career Success.

Institutional	Cultural	Skills	Personal
Bureaucracy Competing interests or demands Departmental politics Poor/lack of leadership Lack of mentors No peers to collaborate with Poor resources No support (money, time) for research and writing	Ageism Racism (general) Department politics re: race Lack of ethnic and racially diverse mentors Research on minority population not valued Poor resources for minorities Low expectations Sexism Department politics re: women Lower salary for women Few women role models	Research skills Time management Goal setting Grant writing	Balance personal and professional demands Emotional fatigue Health Money Personality Social support Uncertainty re: career goal

Three of the authors and a research assistant independently coded 15% of the responses, and then compared the results. Disagreements were deliberated at length and definitions were refined. Coders then coded another 15% of the responses and again discussed any differences. A final operational definition of each code was then developed by consensus. The first author and another project staff member coded all responses. Intercoder reliability (κ) was .93.

Results

Table 1 shows the four barriers categories and subcodes. A total of 141 barrier statements were obtained from 43 participants and coded into subcategories. Thirty-five percent of the barriers listed fell in the institutional category; 28% were cultural, 26% were personal, and 11% were skills barriers. Table 2 lists the most frequently occurring subcodes for each of the types of barriers.

Table 2.

The Top Three Barriers in Each Category With Examples From the Data.

Category	Code	Examples
Institutional	No support research/writing	[Not] having an environment that truly fosters/supports scientific inquiry
		I would really like it if there was a way to consistently fund my summers
		My greatest professional barriers have been identifying and maintaining ongoing support
	Lack of mentors	Not having senior researchers available for collaboration
	Lack of mentors	I no longer recognize [senior faculty] as mentors and have begun expanding my mentoring circle to include NIH-funded scientists from other institutions
	Departmental politics	I was discouraged from pursuing a research idea (one which was ultimately funded) [because] a senior scientist felt the idea was too similar to something she might be interested in doing
	Departmental politics	I have always worked in essentially collaborative settings and I was surprised to see the level of competitiveness
Cultural	Racism (general)	I feel that I have always had to be perfect just to get my foot in the door. I have had colleagues be shocked that I am intelligent, articulate, have a national reputation
Cultural	Racism (general)	Racial microaggressions. Racial unawareness by administration … potentially influencing tenure decisions
	Research on minority populations not valued	It is often more difficult to get published and to get grants focusing on American Indians but that is my area of research because our people are suffering and I have a commitment to contribute as I can to the alleviation of that suffering
	Research on minority populations not valued	Some of the barriers that I’ve encountered around race are due to the fact that I also study race … I feel intellectually isolated. I have had to go outside of the University to find collaborators on grants and papers
	Low expectations	As a woman of color, I face the barrier of being taken seriously, being seen as a person that could lead
	Low expectations	Low expectations in terms of what I should do (teaching rather than research and scholarship) and assignment of duties (assigned skill-based courses rather than theoretical or research)
Skills	Time management	I sometimes feel unable to keep pace with the multiple demands related to clinical, research, and teaching obligations
Skills	Time management	Managing time to conduct research and write (publish)
	Research skills	Research knowledge was taken many years ago and I need to refresh my memory
	Research skills	Limitations in advanced statistics
	Grant writing	[I need] better understanding of funding agencies
	Grant writing	[Lack of] grant writing skills
Personal	Balance personal/professional	Maintaining a balanced personal life, such as being a mother, takes sufficient time that is no longer dedicated to my academic/professional goals
		Having children, balancing time and energy to complete self-driven/motivated projects, such as completing manuscripts, analyzing data, completing grant applications, and so on
		Well, I am married and my wife has her own career, and it is always a challenge to balance work and life with a family
	Personality	Fear of public speaking
	Personality	Being more introverted than extroverted
	Social support	I also have parents who did not go to college and don’t really understand what I do as a professor

Institutional Barriers

The most frequently occurring barriers reflected challenges in the work environment not directly tied to issues of culture or gender. Example statements coded as institutional barriers include “[I do not have] an environment that truly fosters/supports scientific inquiry” and “I would like it if we had good grant administration that made it easy to focus largely on the scientific part of a grant instead of the paperwork and budget.” Institutional barriers often relate to policies and practices related to promotion and tenure. The experience of one Asian female faculty member exemplifies institution-level barriers, where an implied discrepancy between policy and practice resulted in difficulties for her:

I knew that I was recruited because of my demonstrated capacities. I have always worked in essentially collaborative settings and I was surprised to see the level of competitiveness. The dynamics in academia have been challenging. I was given the impression during interviewing for the job that I would be given the time and support to design and pursue my own proposals. However, soon after I began I was abruptly informed by a female senior faculty member that I was NOT hired to be a principal investigator but rather to help senior faculty write their proposals and conduct their research.

Another researcher of American Indian descent described the effects of institution-level gender bias on her career:

When I first arrived at the school most senior female faculty were either not aware or not interested in research. They had no idea that it was a real possibility for me to pursue grants. Some female senior faculty who had no research experience were interested in pursuing grants and assumed that as an untenured faculty member, my role would be to help support their efforts even though I wouldn't learn anything new by contributing to their work. My sense was that my only reward for sharing conceptual frameworks, research knowledge, helping them write proposals, and doing data collection was their positive vote for tenure.

Promotion and tenure policies are determined by institutions and are not based on characteristics of individuals. However, the examples noted above highlight the challenges related to being new and untenured, underscoring the special vulnerabilities faced in the early career period.

Cultural Barriers: Race and Gender

Of the barriers coded as cultural, 72% related to race and 26% related to gender. Participants spoke of low expectations of success by colleagues and supervisors, racial “microaggressions” faced daily, and the effects of unwritten quotas. Example responses included, “I am questioned more often than my non-minority coworkers and different expectations are held for me in comparison to others,” and “I feel that I have always had to be perfect just to get my foot in the door. I have had colleagues be shocked that I am intelligent [and] articulate.”

One woman talked about the cultural differences between her American-Indian background and life at a university:

I was often confused with [the] more covert dynamics of academia. As someone who comes from a poor and then later working-class background I am more comfortable with transparent agendas, direct communication, and mutually helpful relationships. I have always worked in essentially collaborative settings and I was surprised to see the level of competitiveness.

An African American woman described cultural differences in communication styles and how she attempts to work around this challenge effectively:

There is an “indirect” approach to communication in academic settings that is culturally quite foreign to me. After I’ve said “no” three times to someone who is trying to manipulate me into teaching a course that other people have told me isn’t in my best interests, I would like to say “I really don’t want to talk about this again.” Instead I have to say, “Again, I’m really flattered by your request, however, at this point in my career, I feel the need to teach some of the smaller courses in order to concentrate more on my research.” Although I have worked on this, it doesn’t come naturally to me.

Responses from some participants made it clear that gender- and race-related barriers often go hand in hand, resulting in a feeling of uncertainty or frustration. One participant noted that:

The barriers connected to ethnicity are always complex and interwoven with other barriers relating to gender … On one hand I was seen as a valuable assistant. I felt a lot of pressure to help senior faculty conceptualize research questions, access [minority] samples, help write proposals and papers, do data collection and find funding streams. On the other hand—I was given messages that I was too “green” to write my own proposals. For several years I found this to be very confusing and rather intimidating … really started doubting my own abilities and felt really confused and intimidated.

Although this person’s skills as an office assistant were accepted, she faced opposition in moving into leadership roles in her department. This demonstrates the confound between race and gender that can negatively impact career success.

Personal Barriers

Several participants indicated intrinsic or situational issues as career barriers. As many of the participants were parents, it was not surprising that “balancing work and family” was a common personal barrier. For example, an African American woman stated that “I am still trying to figure out how to balance family and career. For example, attending conferences becomes very difficult as child care becomes an issue.” Another African American woman echoed this point, “[one barrier is] balancing work and family … being a very involved mother of two young kids and still wanting to be a ‘rising star’ at work, [the] trajectory I had before marriage and family.”

Other personal barriers were related to interpersonal styles or personality characteristics. The same African American woman commented that “I have a hard time dealing with the hostility of my chair and feel it more personally than I should. I end up wasting precious time and energy on it.”

Another type of personal barrier relates to perceptions of social support, particularly from family members. For minority researchers who may be the first in their families to obtain advanced degrees, the lack of family social support may be especially important to understand. As expressed by an American Indian woman:

I am the first person in my family to graduate from high school. It can be difficult for me to have a foot in two very different worlds. I continue to believe in many of the values and behaviors that I was raised with; at the same time I embrace many values and interests from the class that I have entered. I often find that people in neither world really understand me. I feel isolated and alienated.

This example implies a lack of social support as well as feelings of professional self-doubt, demonstrating the negative impact of personal-level barriers.

Responsibility to one’s cultural community also surfaced as a personal-level barrier. An African American woman described feeling conflicted by requests from her cultural community and finding little time for herself:

I am also frequently approached by members of the larger African-American community, who want me to “do more in the community” and “give back.” I try to balance these requests, and say no as often as I can. Nonetheless, my service burden is higher than it should be. This directly interferes with my productivity.

Adding to this challenge is the lack of others who share her interests and background:

Some of the barriers that I’ve encountered around race are due to the fact that I also study race. I am one of the few people on campus in my area of research. As an African-American, I already feel socially isolated, but because there are so few individuals in my area of research, I also feel intellectually isolated.

Skills Barriers

Several barriers related to specific skills important for career success were identified. Examples include “goal setting,” “receiving external funding,” and “limitations in advanced statistics.” One Latina stated, “My research knowledge was [obtained] many years ago and I need to refresh my memory.” An African American woman described time management as a key skill barrier: “Time management—I sometimes feel unable to keep pace with the multiple demands related to clinical, research, and teaching obligations and relationships with mentors who would be available to adequately prepare me to be a successful scientific investigator.”

Discussion

Qualitative findings from the present study highlight the barriers to career advancement faced by minority researchers. Consistent with previous work on this topic, this study supports the pervasiveness of institutional, cultural, personal, and skills barriers in the professional lives of minorities in research careers. The most common type of barriers identified in this study fell into the institutional category, consistent with other reports in the research literature (Shavers et al., 2005). Issues such as the lack of research support, poor mentoring, and dealing with departmental politics were most common in the present sample. These institution-level issues might be considered par for the course in the navigation of professional careers in the research sciences; it could be argued that all individuals must successfully overcome these barriers in order to achieve career success. What is compelling about the present findings, however, is that these barriers can cooccur with cultural barriers that place an undue burden on minority researchers.

Unclear or inconsistent expectations for tenure and promotion surfaced as an institutional barrier in our study, paralleling other studies of minority faculty members (Fang et al., 2000). Despite formal university policies, inconsistent practices in the promotion/tenure process for some minority scholars can threaten career success. Effectively voicing concerns about inconsistencies and finding ways to advocate for oneself are strategies that can be used to counter this problem and may be particularly important survival strategies for minority researchers.

Barriers in the cultural category pertained to both race and gender. For minority researchers, the overarching effect of cultural barriers seems to be a feeling of isolation. Without a “community of colleagues,” (NAS, 2007, p. 166), minority researchers may stagnate in their careers or leave the system entirely. Garnering support from other scholars, whether within or beyond one’s home institution, is another survival strategy that may alleviate marginalization. Reaching out to supportive mentors can serve as a protective function for minority researchers, providing social as well as professional support that will promote career success. The cooccurrence of race and gender barriers described by many of the participants in this study emphasizes the need to acknowledge and address this complex relationship.

Personal barriers such as balancing work and family demands and skill barriers such as time management were also confirmed in this study, consistent with other research (Cropsey et al., 2008). Strategies to alleviate role overload and promote effective time management may be good general strategies for promoting workplace success. Responsibilities for one’s cultural community as well as the lack of social support from family members pose an additional barrier to career success for researchers of color. In order to best promote career success, understanding common barriers as well as those that are unique to researchers of color is important.

Future Directions

Career counselors play a critical role in shaping the trajectories of minority researchers. Findings from the present study provide information about common barriers to career success that counselors can consider in their work with students interested in science careers. Awareness of the role of culture in shaping career choices and outcomes is an important starting point (Byars-Winston, 2010) and can complement specific strategies for eliminating institutional, cultural, personal, and skills barriers to career success. Though various policy and training initiatives have been implemented over the years to promote diversity in the behavioral sciences (Ginther et al., 2011), these efforts should accompany serious focus on eliminating career barriers that are known detriments to career success for minority researchers. Moreover, concerted efforts should be made by career counselors to address the needs of women minority researchers who often face challenges that relate to both gender and race.

At the federal level, programs designed to support minority researchers (e.g., DHHS’ supplement to promote diversity in health-related research, and NIH’s MARC program) can offer strategies for identifying and eliminating barriers to career success at various levels.

At the institutional level, many universities have an established diversity policy; yet, this may not be enough to address the barriers that minority researchers face. Careful explanation of policies and expectations for promotion and tenure are paramount for faculty success, and efforts to ensure fair treatment for all should be made. At the individual level, career counselors can talk about cultural, institutional, personal, and skills barriers with their clients and provide information about supports to counter these barriers. They can encourage early- and mid-career minority researchers to network and seek professional development opportunities similar to the LTI that specifically address career advancement. These professional development opportunities should offer training in both personal (e.g., balancing) and professional (e.g., grant writing) skills that promote success (e.g., DeRosier, McMillen, Davis, Kameny, & Hoffend, 2011).

Though the present study provides insights into the real experiences of minority researchers and barriers to career success, some caveats should be noted. While the unit of analysis was at the level of the coded statement, it is possible that with more participants, more codes would have emerged from the data. Additional exploration of the types of codes and further investigation into the barriers that were identified here also warrant more exploration. A more in-depth investigation into barriers by racial/ethnic group could serve to highlight similarities and differences across subgroups that can be important in strategy development.

The qualitative examination of barriers to career success among members of underrepresented groups is an important step in the development of strategies for coping with barriers and promoting positive career paths. Findings from the present study provide career counselors with some perspective on the various types of barriers that minority researchers face. Using this knowledge to provide culturally tailored strategies, career counselors can play a vital role in minority researchers’ career development and success.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the members of the Leadership Training Institute for their whole-hearted participation in this project. Their genuineness and honesty are greatly appreciated. Thanks also to invaluable feedback from our writing group, led by Ndidi Okeke-Adeyanju. Special thanks to Rachel Smith and Aqiyla Thomas for their help in manuscript preparation.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This research was supported in whole or in part with Federal funds from the National Institute of Mental Health under Grant No. HHSN271200774104C.

References

Byars-Winston

(2010). The vocational significance of Black identity: Cultural formulation approach to career assessment and career counseling. Journal of Career Development, 37, 441–464.

Chang

(2012, September 24). Bias persists for women of science, a study finds. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/science/bias-persists-against-women-of-science-a-study-says.html

Cropsey

K. L.

Masho

S. W.

Shiang

Sikka

Kornstein

S. G.

Hampton

C. L.

(2008). Why do faculty leave? Reasons for attrition of women and minority faculty from a medical school: Four-year results. Journal of Women’s Health, 17, 1111–1118. doi:10.1089/jwh.2007.0582

Deitch

E. A.

Barsky

Butz

R. M.

Brief

A. P.

Chan

S. S. Y.

Bradley

J. C.

(2003). Subtle yet significant: The existence and impact of everyday racial discrimination in the workplace. Human Relations, 56, 1299–1324.

DeRosier

McMillen

J. S.

Davis

N. O.

Kameny

Hoffend

(2011). Tools to support career advancement of diverse social, behavioral, and mental health researchers: Comparison of in-person and online training delivery modes. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org

Fang

Moy

Colburn

, & Hurley (2000). Racial and ethnic disparities in faculty promotion in academic medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284, 1085–1092.

Flores

L. Y.

Heppner

M. J.

(2002). Multicultural career counseling: Ten essentials for training. Journal of Career Development, 28, 181–202.

Flores

L. Y.

Ramos

Kanagui

(2010). Applying the cultural formulation approach to career counseling with Latinas/os. Journal of Career Development, 37, 411–422.

Ginther

D. K.

Schaffer

W. T.

Schnell

Masimore

Liu

Haak

L. L.

Raynard

(2011). Race, ethnicity, and NIG research awards. Science, 333, 1015–1019.

10.

Grant

Hansman

C. A.

Jackson

Spencer

(1999). Beyond diversity: Dismantling barriers in education. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26, 16.

11.

Harley

(2008). Maids of academe: African American women faculty at predominately White institutions. Journal of African American Studies, 12, 19–36.

12.

Jackson

(2008). Race segregation across the academic workforce: Exploring factors that may contribute to the disparate representation of African American men. American Behavioral Scientist, 51, 1004–1029.

13.

Jeste

D. V.

Twamley

E. W.

Cardenas

Lebowitz

Reynolds

(2009). A call for training the trainers: Focus on mentoring to enhance diversity in mental health research. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 31–37. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.154633

14.

Leboy

P. S.

Madden

J. F.

(2012) Limitations on diversity in basic science departments. DNA and Cell Biology, 31, 1–7. doi:10.1089/dna.2012.1756

15.

Maton

K. I.

Kohout

J. L.

Wicherski

Leary

G. E.

Vinokurov

(2006). Minority students of color and the psychology graduate pipeline. American Psychologist, 61, 117–131.

16.

McMillen

Davis

DeRosier

Greenblatt

Huffman

(2010). Leadership training institute: Career advancement for diverse researchers. Cary, NC: 3-C Institute for Social Development.

17.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

18.

Nagle

(2010, May). Two worlds. UMaine Today, 10. Retrieved from http://umainetoday.umaine.edu/past-issues/spring-2010/

19.

National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. (2007). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the academic potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

20.

National Institute of Mental Health. (2001). An investment in America's future: Racial/ethnic diversity in mental health research careers (NIH Publication No. 01-4982). Retrieved from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/advisory-boards-and-groups/namhc/reports/nimh-diversity.pdf

21.

National Research Council. (2005). Advancing the nation’s health needs: NIH research training programs. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11275

22.

National Science Foundation. (2000, September). Land of plenty: Diversity as America’s competitive edge in science, engineering and technology (Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/cawmset0409/cawmset_0409.pdf

23.

National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics (NSF). (2011, February). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wpmd/

24.

Niemann

Y. F.

Dovidio

J. F.

(1998). Relationship of solo status, academic rank, and perceived distinctiveness to job satisfaction of racial/ethnic minorities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 55–71. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.83.1.55

25.

Ortiz

S. Y.

Roscigno

V. J.

(2009). Discrimination, women, and work: Processes and variations by race and class. The Sociological Quarterly, 50, 336–359.

26.

Palepu

Carr

P. L.

Friedman

R. H.

Ash

A. S.

Moskowitz

M. A.

(2000). Specialty choices, compensation, and career satisfaction of underrepresented minority faculty in academic medicine. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 75, 157–160. doi:10.1097/00001888-200002000-00014

27.

Pearlin

L. I.

Schieman

Fazio

E. M.

Meersman

S. C.

(2005). Stress, health, and the life course: Some conceptual perspectives. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46, 205–219. doi: 10.1177/002214650504600206

28.

Reynolds

C. F.

Pilkonis

P. A.

Kupfer

D. J.

Dunn

Pincus

H. A.

(2007). Training future generations of mental health researchers: Devising strategies for tough times. Academic Psychiatry, 31, 151–159. doi:10.1176/appi.ap.31.2.152

29.

Shavers

V. L.

Fagan

Lawrence

McCaskill-Stevens

McDonald

Browne

Trimble

(2005). Barriers to racial/ethnic minority application and competition for NIH research funding. Journal of the National Medical Association, 97, 1063–1077.

30.

Sung

N. S.

Crowley

W. F.

Genel

Salber

Sandy

Sherwood

L. M.

,… Rimoin

(2003). Central challenges facing the national clinical research enterprise. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 1278–1287.

31.

Tabak

L. A.

Collins

F. S.

(2011). Weaving a rich tapestry in biomedical science. Science, 333, 940–941.

32.

Triana

M. D. C.

Garcia

M. F.

Colella

(2010). Managing diversity: How organizational efforts to support diversity moderate the effects of perceived racial discrimination on affective commitment. Personnel Psychology, 63, 817–843.

33.

Turner

C. S. V.

González

J. C.

Wood

J. L.

(2008). Faculty of color in academe: What 20 years of literature tells us. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(3), 139–168. doi:10.1037/a0012837

34.

Vasquez

M. J. T.

Lott

García-Vázquez

Grant

Iwamasa

G. Y.

Molina

L. E.,

… Vestal-Dowdy

(2006). Personal reflections: Barriers and strategies in increasing diversity in psychology. American Psychologist, 61. 157–172. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.2.157