A new study from researchers at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University shows that aspiring female and minority commercial pilots face bias from not only consumers, but also other pilots.
The research, published in Technology in Society, showed that consumers and other pilots respond more favorably to white male pilots over female and minority pilots.
“The aviation industry needs to be aware that this bias exists because they need to make sure their hiring process is fair to women and minorities,” said Stephen Rice, a professor of Human Factors. “They need to do whatever it takes to help women and minorities overcome these societal problems.”
Embry-Riddle Ph.D. student Nadine Ragbir, the lead author of the paper, said the most valuable part of the research was demonstrating that implicit, or unconscious, biases exist.
“While some people know they are being biased or prejudiced against an individual, others may not even know they feel that way,” said Ragbir. “Just being able to make people aware that there are unconscious biases that could influence their thoughts and actions is a step forward.”
The experiment involved showing photographs of female and male pilots of various races to participants, then asking them to rate how well they thought the pilots would perform. Respondents gave higher ratings to white male pilots.
Ragbir, who developed a childhood interest in aviation when her paratrooper uncle taught her about different kinds of aircraft, earned both her bachelor’s and master’s degrees in Human Factors at Embry-Riddle’s Daytona Beach Campus. She said the topic of the research came about through collaboration, while the authors discussed a type of software tool used in behavioral research that can reveal implicit bias based on the participants’ response times. Basically, response times are longer when implicit bias is involved, because participants are reluctant to blatantly admit to biased responses and tend to take more time to consider, the researchers explained.
“Being in a school centered around aviation, we could not help but ask ourselves if these biases exist in airline passengers and pilots alike,” Ragbir said.
She added that diversity and inclusion programs would be her first recommendation for the aviation industry.
Despite the pandemic, air travel is projected to expand over the coming years, and with a large percentage of the industry’s workforce reaching retirement age, a shortage of aviation professionals is predicted, Rice said. The research paper pointed out that bias could deprive the industry of the best job candidates.
“One of the main goals in hiring is to recruit … the most qualified candidates,” the study states. “Potential employees are often unintentionally under-evaluated due to biases, and specific groups could be unfairly kept out of the cockpit and better candidates excluded.”
The fact that pilots themselves demonstrated bias against female and minority pilots was of particular concern, according to Rice.
“Those pilots may be in positions of power one day to make hiring choices,” he said.
This paper was written by a PHD candidate with a obvious bias as well as “bone to pick”. Her academic institution, ERAU, while recognized in the ‘aviation community’, is hardly an example of academic rigor in that nearly 2/3rds of all applicants are admitted and once enrolled have a paltry 41% graduation rate. Pay your fee, buy your B.
Funny when all you look for is “unconscious bias” and “systemic rcaism” that is all you find. You can cook up any situation to justify your worldview. If there is a bias in society it is with all these so called social justice warriors with the axe of reparations or whatever to finance their next piece of soapbox clatter.
Maybe when i am sitting in seat 5A I actually don’t give a flying F&(@(@ who is in the front flying the plane. Like 99% of the flying public.
This “study” is from a sample size of one i bet and the results were probably already determined i am willing to bet
“Most qualified” has been relegated to just being a “label” anymore, particularly where race or gender
are concerned. Those two terms are now at the top of the “most qualified” list. I know this from personal
experience in some jobs I have interviewed for, particularly when I have seen who they hired (instead of
myself at the time), and how short of an employment period these “most qualified” folks had once hired…..they were usually let out the door within 6-8 weeks of being hired under the pretense of “down sizing”, or “contract termination” or some other make-believe excuse.
Regarding pilots, particularly those who fly large airplanes, it’s a technically demanding job, where one
requires a functioning brain with a strong emphasis on fast thinking and STEM skills, a horrendous
amount of aviation knowledge, training, then sustained follow-on recurrent training, refresher training, et al. The job is made harder since the flight engineer has been yanked out of the cockpit. I do not envy
those pilots.
Another ridiculous study like this being repeated here and I’m done with this site. We already have to listen to how bad we all are because some people aren’t rich and famous because it’s our fault without having to listen to it here. Ditto for doing business with your sponsors.
MINORITY noun The smaller number or part, especially a number that is less than half the whole number.
Referring to someone as a minority makes no reference to their qualifications, only that there are less of them the others. But modern society in it’s rush to label everyone and everything has determined that a “minority” is somehow less in all respects, be it intellectually, economically, or what ever.
Once you accept that label, you are automatically condemning yourself to the back row, telling the whole world that you are “less than” and require special consideration. Qualifications just went out the window and you will fight twice as hard to gain back that ground.
If you truly want to fight against something, then fight against politicians, the media and bogus university studies that cram their “poor minority” agendas down everyone’s throat.
They are your real enemy.
Implicit bias is highly contested and one of the key exhibits in the so-called replication crisis affecting psychological research. I would much prefer General Aviation News report real news instead of regurgitating University press releases.
It stands to reason, given a public expectation, from historical norms, that the handsome, 5’11’ white male would naturally be accepted as a snapshot of the general public’s expectation. But this is quickly being overcome due to the added interest and stellar performance of females and non-whites alike. THEY are the ones overcoming the old NORM. Mandates forcing employers to hire less qualified does nothing, but put the public at unecessary risk. Women, who take on the challenge and prove their abilites are quickly adopted into the aviation community. I’ve a CFI daughter who is sought after, due to her reputation of being a great instructor. She’s also ATP rated and flys for an aerial fire fighting company. She’d be the first to admit that there was some mild bias by a few of the male pilots when she first showed up, but this was quickly overcome when her abilities shown through as a capable and competent pilot. It’s time to stop feeling sorry or guilty for the past and move forward. The thin glass ceiling is easily broken when there is desire and capability.
I agree and your daughter is probably a perfect example of what I see regularly in aviation and my roughly 30 years in my day job and in related higher education. (Think aviation adjacent, hardcore STEM and your probably close.) If you show up, do the job, and do it well, the rest is irrelevant. I believe that, in this context, there is a lot of truth to the saying, “Those who mind, don’t matter. And those who matter, don’t mind.”
She also sounds like more (actual) evidence of what makes me seriously question all of the “evidence” and “data” that supports the conclusion that this is still a widespread problem that requires this much attention and active (intrusive, and counterproductive) intervention.
In fact, I even wonder if the “mild bias” she perceived was actually the same kind of ultimately-good-natured “breaking in the new (guy)” stuff that I (as a “guy”) tend to expect until I prove myself as one of the team. Maybe, just maybe, they were actually treating her just like anyone else, but she couldn’t see that due to expectation bias that has been driven into her head by the media for all of her life?
While I do not doubt that this occurs on both the conscious and unconscious level in various situations, what about the reverse end of this spectrum when qualified white male pilots are not hired in favor of less qualified individuals because of their race or gender? What about layoffs of more senior white male pilots in a non-union corporate situation that keeps less qualified / less experienced minority new hires? I have witnessed this first hand starting in the mid 1990’s through today. To tell me that minorities and women don’t have an advantage in today’s hiring environment means you have only focused on one aspect and included data to support your hypothesis and have failed to include a counter view of the situation that takes into account the “new” metrics of hiring which seem to be based on skin tone and genitalia, not qualifications and experience.
Well, with the new political regime and their buzzwords of “equity”, you are going
to see a whole lot more of what you wrote about…..This in turn will marginalize
the most qualified in favor of those who just “show up”; –everyone– then gets the
same prize, pay, benefits, promotions, etc. In short, excellence and hard work no
longer count, and to a degree, mediocre performance, just barely passing or making the grade will suffice and race and gender identification will carry the day……count on it. Its
part of the “new normal”.
How can anyone give a worthwhile answer to a pilot’s qualifications based solely on a photograph? I would guess that the “participants” in this study simply gave random data because they could not give valid information based on what they were given. Or, they were selected to give answers that would suggest bias.
Looks like this was “research” with an agenda to come to this conclusion.
Fair to women & minorities? Isn’t that another way to say women and minorities get preference to make up for our sordid past? And isn’t any group getting preference based on race or gender against the law already?
How about ‘hire the most qualified, regardless of race/gender/sexual orientation/who they voted for.