Mentoring in Academia 1

Payne, S. C., Thompson, R. J., & Pesonen, A. (2011, April). Mentoring in academia: Who needs it? Paper presented at the 26th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Poster TITLE Mentoring in Academia: Who needs it?

ABSTRACT This study identified some personal and situational characteristics of faculty members associated with the perceived need for mentoring and determined that less experienced employees, women and ethnic minorities reported significantly stronger needs for all mentoring functions. Employees who experienced incivility or discrimination reported a significantly higher need for psychosocial mentoring.

PRESS PARAGRAPH Extensive research has revealed the value of mentoring to protégés, mentors, and organizations, yet little research has explicitly examined who perceives the strongest need for mentoring. This study identified some personal and situational characteristics of faculty members associated with the perceived need for mentoring and determined that less experienced employees, women, and ethnic minorities reported significantly stronger needs for all mentoring functions. Employees who experienced incivility or discrimination reported a significantly higher need for psychosocial mentoring. Implications for faculty development and university climate are discussed.

Mentoring in Academia 2

Mentoring in Academia: Who needs it?

The value of mentoring for protégés is well established (Allen, Eby, Poteet, Lentz, &

Lima, 2004). Mentoring has been shown to positively relate to numerous individual outcomes including salary, promotions (Scandura, 1992), career satisfaction, commitment, and job involvement (Aryee & Chay, 1994). Mentoring is beneficial for mentors and organizations as well (Russell & Adams, 1997). As a result, many formal mentoring programs have been instituted by organizations (e.g., AT&T, Federal Express). Whereas the benefits of mentoring are clear, who perceives the greatest need for mentoring has not been addressed.

The success of any mentoring relationship is likely to depend on the protégés’ recognition of their individual needs for mentoring and willingness to be mentored. Although a significant amount of research has examined protégé and mentor characteristics such as demographics and personality variables (e.g., Fagenson, 1992), minimal research has empirically examined protégé perceived need for mentoring and/or motivation to be mentored (Wanberg,

Welsh, & Hezlett, 2003). Correspondingly, we attempt to identify the characteristics of protégés who perceive a greater need for mentoring, specifically characteristics of faculty in academia, a context in which mentoring has been identified as crucial (Johnson, 2007).

Mentorship has been defined as “an intense interpersonal exchange between a senior experienced colleague (mentor) and a less experienced junior colleague (protégé) in which the mentor provides support, direction, and feedback regarding career plans and personal development” (Russell & Adams, 1997, p. 2). Mentors provide multiple sources of support (also referred to as mentoring functions) to their protégés including career-related support, psychosocial support, and role modeling (Kram, 1983; Scandura, 1992). Career-related support is intended to aid in career advancement and involves coaching, supplying protection, providing Mentoring in Academia 3 challenging assignments, increasing employee exposure and visibility, and direct forms of sponsorship. Psychosocial support is intended to facilitate feelings of competence and includes serving as friend and counselor by providing positive regard and acceptance (Dreher & Ash,

1990). Finally, mentors can also serve as role models for protégés (Scandura, 1992).

In organizational and academic contexts, experience and seniority are often quite salient through job titles and associated responsibilities. As newcomers are socialized into the organization, they learn how to do their job within the organizational context as well as priorities and expectations. Correspondingly, we anticipate that less experienced employees will perceive greater career-related and role modeling mentoring needs. To the extent to which they are new to the geographical location or the industry as a whole, they are also likely to benefit from psychosocial mentoring.

Hypothesis 1: Employees with less organizational experience will report a stronger need

for (a) career-related, (b) role modeling, and (c) psychosocial mentoring than employees

with more organizational experience.

Minority Status

In their review of the mentoring literature, Wanberg, Welsch, and Hezlett (2003) note that sex and race have received a fair amount of attention. However, these issues have not been substantially explored in certain organizational settings; thus, these issues may be more complex within specific types of jobs. Women and ethnic minorities who seek careers in less diverse environments may find it difficult to both break into and thrive in these work settings. All individuals experience some barriers to career success; however some settings may present additional obstacles for minorities. In academia, women and nonwhite employees are traditionally the minority. Mentoring in Academia 4

Sex

Research has demonstrated that women greatly benefit from having a mentor (e.g.,

Ragins & Cotton, 1999; Ragins & Scandura, 1994). Mentoring relationships are likely necessary,

for women in most organizations, as success and advancement often necessitates that women

develop a sense of belonging in environments that may value masculine over feminine traits

(McKeen & Bujaki, 2007). “Career women” typically feel pressured to emphasize masculine

traits such as competence while downplaying feminine traits such as interpersonal warmth;

breaking of such gender roles is often received negatively and provokes feelings of threat and

resentment (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002). Clearly, navigating the confusion that may result

from stepping outside of gender norms to build a successful career is a challenge for women,

which likely requires the assistance of a mentor to surmount. Additionally, as women tend to be

more concerned with balancing work and family than men, women may uniquely benefit from

psychosocial support (Bernstein & Russo, 2008).

Additionally, mentored women in academia, compared to nonmentored women faculty,

had lower rates of turnover, received promotions more frequently, and annually received over

$4500 more in grants, suggesting the value of career-related mentoring and role modeling for academic women (Gardiner, Tiggeman, Kearns, & Marshall, 2007). The present study will further examine mentoring for women in academia by determining the extent to which women faculty perceive a greater need for mentoring than men faculty. We propose:

Hypothesis 2: Women faculty will report a higher need for (a) career-related mentoring,

(b) role modeling, and (c) psychosocial mentoring than men faculty.

Women in STEM Mentoring in Academia 5

Much research on mentoring of women has focused on women protégés in science,

technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers in which women continue to be greatly

underrepresented; among PhDs, there is a greater scarcity of women in STEM careers than any

other discipline (Bernstein & Russo, 2008). The underrepresentation of women in these fields

creates a concern that the lack of diversity limits innovative ideas that may be put forth by

individuals with diverse perspectives (Bernstein & Russo, 2008). Moreover, because STEM

fields are associated with prestige and social power, opening these careers to all individuals

facilitates a social justice agenda.

It has frequently been suggested that mentoring can serve to retain women in STEM fields. Ramaswami, Dreher, Bretz, and Weithoff (2010) found that in male-dominated industries,

having a senior male mentor was strongly related to compensation and career progress

satisfaction for women protégés. This effect was greater than the effect for women in gender

neutral industries and for men in both male-dominated and gender neutral industries.

While it seems that men mentors can provide valuable career-related mentoring and role modeling to women in STEM fields, having a woman mentor is especially important for psychosocial mentoring in highly masculine environments. Settles Cortina, Stewart, and Malley,

(2007) reported that in natural sciences, mentoring by women - but not men - was related to

perceptions of voice for women protégés. Furthermore, Ferriman, Lubinski, and Benbow (2009)

found that between the ages of 25 and 35, the priorities of math and science graduate students changed such that women’s desire for flexible work schedules and limited work hours increased, and these issues as well as being free on weekends showed greater discrepancies between men and women. Such changes were most profound for women with children, suggesting a stronger need for psychosocial mentoring which may best be provided by women mentors. Mentoring in Academia 6

Unfortunately, it is widely accepted that there is a lack of available female mentors in

STEM fields. Because female mentor-female protégé relationships tend to be most visible in

fields where women are underrepresented on the whole, making them more subject to scrutiny

and pressure associated with token status (Kanter, 1977), women may be less willing to mentor

than men (Ragins & Cotton, 1993). Ragins and Cotton (1993) empirically demonstrated that

women perceived greater drawbacks to becoming a mentor than men. Women reported feeling

unqualified to mentor, not wanting to risk their reputation due to a protégé’s failures, lacking

time to mentor, and perceiving greater costs than benefits to mentoring. Because it seems that

women mentors can serve as role models and advocates for female protégés in ways that men

mentors may not, a lack of women mentors may leave potential protégés experiencing a stronger

need for adequate mentoring.

The (un)availability of men mentors for women in STEM fields may also present barriers for women. One study of men in chemistry found that men were more likely than women to report having had help from a professor in obtaining undergraduate research experience and in choosing a graduate school (Nolan, Buckner, Marzabadi, & Kuck, 2008). Given that research indicates a probable preference for women mentors, as well as a lack of women and men mentors for women in STEM fields, we propose:

Hypothesis 3: Women in male dominated fields (STEM departments) will report a higher

need for (a) career-related mentoring, (b) role modeling, and (c) psychosocial mentoring

than women in non-male dominated fields (non-STEM departments).

Race/Ethnicity

Less research has been conducted to determine the effect of, and need for, mentoring for ethnic minorities. However, one study found that African American and Hispanic MBAs were Mentoring in Academia 7

less likely than their White counterparts to establish mentoring relationships (Dreher & Cox,

1996). Further, Settles et al., (2007) found that White women reported more felt influence in

their departments than Black women, suggesting that ethnic minorities may feel less capable as

mentors. This is problematic due to research demonstrating a preference for similar ethnicity

mentors among minority protégés. For instance, Gonzales-Figueroa and Young (2005) found that

Latina women reported a preference for similar ethnicity mentors; however these women were not unwilling to be mentored, despite the lack of Latina women in mentoring positions. Ortiz-

Walters and Gilson (2005) reported that protégés of color perceived more psychosocial mentoring, instrumental support, satisfaction, and interpersonal comfort with mentors of color than White mentors. Encouragingly, however, mentors’ perceptions of relationships with their protégés of color were not affected by ethnic dissimilarity.

Witt Smith, Smith, and Markham, (2000) found that for White faculty members, having a mentor was positively related to affective commitment and lower intent to turnover; however this was not the case for minority faculty members. They posit that minorities may need significantly more career and psychosocial mentoring than their White counterparts. They also note that the role modeling function of mentoring may be particularly important for minority protégés, due to a lack of role models in their organization (Witt Smith et al., 2000). Mentors to ethnic minorities need to be aware of ethnic identity issues, recognize the role of stereotype threat in inducing stress, recognize the existence of racial discrimination within and outside of academia, and advocate for protégés against discrimination (Alvarez, Blume, Cervantes, & Thomas, 2009).

Because of the abundance of concerns uniquely facing protégés of color, as well as an apparent preference for (and lack of) mentors of color among ethnic minorities, we hypothesized: Mentoring in Academia 8

Hypothesis 4: Ethnic minorities will report a stronger need for (a) career-related, (b)

role modeling, and (c) psychosocial mentoring.

Hostile Organizational Climate

In addition to personal, demographic variables, need for mentoring is also likely to relate to situational variables such as the overall organizational climate. To the extent that the climate is unwelcoming and uncivil, employees are likely to need the guidance that mentoring often provides in order to cope with the obstacles of a hostile climate.

Workplace incivility can be defined as devious behavior that violates workplace norms and has an indistinct aim to hurt others (Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Lim & Cortina, 2005). The key feature of this form of interpersonal mistreatment is the ambiguous nature of the intentions of the individuals performing the actions, which are often attributed to other factors (Lim &

Cortina, 2005).

Other forms of mistreatment, such as discrimination are more direct. Discrimination can be categorized in two ways: (a) access discrimination, which refers to obstacles that prevent individuals in a particular group from obtaining employment and (b) treatment discrimination,

which refers to unfair actions or behaviors that occur toward a group once they have obtained

employment (Jones, 1997; Levitin, Quinn, & Staines, 1971). We focus on the latter, as this

relates to the climate that individuals face after they enter organizations.

Previous research has shown that individuals in uncivil and discriminatory work

environments experience increased job stress, turnover intentions, and decreased job satisfaction

(Cortina, Magley, Williams, & Langhout, 2001; Levitin et al., 1971; Lim & Cortina, 2005). The impact of everyday work interactions may lead these individuals to have difficulties that mentoring may be able to mitigate. Mentoring in Academia 9

Psychosocial mentoring functions include “acceptance-and-confirmation, counseling, and

friendship” (Kram, 1988, p. 32). Within this function, protégés are able to discuss problems,

anxieties, and fears, while mentors provide support through personal experience and feedback

(Kram, 1988). Thus, psychosocial mentoring may buffer “the organizational force that can

contribute to alienation and a decline in self-worth” (Kram, 1988, p. 38). For example, mentors can facilitates protégés sense of voice (Settles et al., 2007).

Thus we expect that individuals in hostile climates with high levels of workplace incivility and discrimination are likely to also have higher needs for psychosocial mentoring.

Hypothesis 5: Employees who experience uncivil workplace behavior will report a

stronger need for psychosocial mentoring.

Hypothesis 6: Employees who are victims of discrimination will report a stronger need

for psychosocial mentoring.

Method

Participants and Procedure

All 3133 faculty at a Southwestern university were invited by the Dean of Faculties to

participate in a faculty climate survey in November of 2009. Surveys were administered online

and linked to faculty member e-mail addresses; thus responses were confidential but not

anonymous. A total of 742 faculty members responded for a 24% response rate. Consistent with

the broader population, the majority of respondents were white (573, 82.3%) and male (462,

63.9%). On average, respondents had been at the university 13.4 (SD = 11.18) years. In terms of

rank, there were 9 (1.2%) administrators, 229 (31.6%) full professors, 150 (20.7%) associate

professors, 176 (24.3%) assistant professors, and 161 (22.2%) non tenure track professors. In

terms of tenure status, 391 (53.3%) were tenured and 182 (24.8%) were tenure-track. Four Mentoring in Academia 10

hundred five respondents were in STEM departments (242 were not in STEM departments and

95 could not be classified).

Measures

Need for Mentoring. Twelve items were developed for this survey to assess need for

mentoring. All items began with the following question: “To what extent do you think you would

benefit from having a mentor provide one or more of the following for you?” Eight items were

designed to capture career-related mentoring, two items were designed to assess the need for

psychosocial mentoring, and one item focused on the need for role model mentoring. All items

were responded to on a 5-point scale (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely) and appear in Table 1.

Incivility. We assessed incivility with a 7-item measure developed by Cortina, Magley,

Williams, and Langhout (2001). All items began with the following text: “During the past year, have you been in a situation in your department/unit where someone” and were responded to on a 5-point frequency scale (1 = never, 5 = very often). Example items read: “Put you down or was condescending to you?” and “Ignored or excluded you from professional camaraderie?”

Discrimination. Respondents were asked if they had experienced any job-related discrimination with the last year and the basis for this discrimination. These questions were formatted in a 13x11 matrix in which 13 job-related decisions were listed as rows (e.g., hiring, promotion, salary, etc.) and 11 bases for discrimination (e.g., nationality, race/ethnicity, sex, etc.) were listed at the top of each column. Respondents checked a box if they had experienced at least one incident of discrimination in each cell. These items were summed to create an overall discrimination score.

Mentoring in Academia 11

Results

Descriptive statistics, correlations, and coefficient alphas appear in Table 2 for the ful sample as well as women faculty separately. Hypothesis 1 proposed that employees with less organizational experience would report a stronger need for career-related mentoring, role modeling, and psychosocial mentoring. Consistent with expectations, organizational tenure was negatively related to need for career mentoring, role modeling, and psychosocial mentoring (r = -

.39, -.41, -.46, p < .01, respectively). Also of interest, tenure status (non-tenure track/tenure track

= 0, tenured = 1) was found to negatively relate to need for career mentoring, role modeling, and psychosocial mentoring (r = -.37, -.34., -.38, p < .01, respectively).

Hypothesis 2 proposed that women faculty would report a higher need for all types of mentoring than men faculty. Consistent with expectations, there was a significant univariate effect for sex on all dependent variables. Women faculty (M = 3.03, SD = 1.14) reported a higher need for career-related mentoring than men faculty (M = 2.62, SD =1.23; t(685) = -4.33, p < .00).

In addition, women faculty (M = 2.90, SD = 1.35) reported a higher need for psychosocial mentoring than men faculty (M = 2.49, SD = 1.40; t(679) = -3.78, p < .00). Finally, women faculty (M = 2.98, SD = 1.25) reported a higher need for psychosocial mentoring than men faculty (M = 2.62, SD = 1.23; t(680) = -5.77, p < .00).

Hypothesis 3 proposed that women faculty in male dominated fields (STEM) would report a higher need for all types of mentoring than women faculty in non-male dominated fields.

A one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated that this however, was not supported, by the Pillai-Bartlett Trace F approximation (F(4, 204) = .79), p >.05).

Hypothesis 4 proposed that ethnic minorities would report a stronger need for all types of mentoring was supported. An independent-samples t test confirmed that minorities (M = 3.46, Mentoring in Academia 12

SD = 1.08) reported a significantly higher need for career mentoring than whites (M = 2.67, SD =

1.20; t(668) = -4.91, p < .01). Similarly, minorities (M = 3.30, SD = 1.32) have a significantly higher need for role modeling than whites (M = 2.57, SD = 1.38, t(663) = -4.00, p < .01). Finally, minorities (M = 3.53, SD = 1.13) have a significantly higher need for psychosocial mentoring than whites (M = 2.66, SD = 1.25; t(668) = -5.44, p < .01).

Hypothesis 5 proposed that individuals who experience more workplace incivility would report a greater need for psychosocial mentoring. As predicted, workplace incivility was positively related to need for psychosocial mentoring (r = .09, p < .05).

Finally, Hypothesis 6 proposed that individuals who experience more discrimination would report a greater need for psychosocial mentoring. Consistent with expectations, total discrimination was positively related to need for psychosocial mentoring (r = .09, p < .05).

Discussion

The results of this study indicate that perceived need for mentoring is related to protégé personal and situational characteristics. Consistent with the definition of mentoring, faculty with less organizational experience reported a stronger need for all three types of mentoring.

Consistent with expectations based on theory concerning minority status, women faculty reported stronger needs for all three forms of mentoring than men, and ethnic minorities reported stronger needs for all three forms of mentoring compared to non-minorities. Also as predicted, faculty who had experienced workplace incivility and discrimination were more likely to report needing psychosocial mentoring than faculty who had not experienced this mistreatment.

The consistency in results across all three forms of mentoring is quite interesting and raise some additional research questions that need to be addressed. Should the same mentor provide all types of support or should a protégé seek three separate mentors? Alternatively, Mentoring in Academia 13

faculty members may seek separate mentors and all three types of support for their three primary

work-related responsibilities: teaching, research, and service.

Contrary to expectation, compared to women in non-STEM fields, women in STEM

fields did not report stronger needs for mentoring. In post-hoc exploratory analyses, it was further revealed that organizational tenure did not interact with STEM status; thus pre-tenure

women in STEM fields did not report stronger needs for mentoring than post-tenure women in

STEM fields. However, women faculty in STEM reported significantly greater need for

mentoring than men faculty in STEM. As depicted in Table 2, STEM status was not significantly

related to perceived need for any forms of mentoring. Given the prevalence of STEM fields and

faculty on the campus for this study, there may be less differentiation and corresponding

differential treatment for individuals who are not in STEM fields. Alternatively, regardless of

whether their discipline is male-dominated or not, women in academia may perceive a greater

need for mentoring.

This research is predicated on the idea that the success of any mentoring relationship is

likely to depend on the protégés’ recognition of their individual needs for mentoring and

willingness to be mentored. However, these relationships were not examined in this study. Thus,

a direction for future research is to explore the extent to which need for mentoring has direct

effects on mentoring outcomes and/or moderates relationships with mentoring outcomes.

We acknowledge some of the limitations of our research. All of the data examined were

collected via confidential self-report surveys at one time period. While this may present some

concerns about common method bias (specifically social desirability bias), common methods are

unlikely to drive relationships with demographic variables, respondents are the best source of Mentoring in Academia 14 perceptions (incivility, discrimination, and need for mentoring), and the data did reveal some nonsignificant relationships.

In conclusion, some faculty in academia perceive a greater need for mentoring than others. Less experienced employees, women, and ethnic minorities reported significantly stronger needs for all mentoring functions. Employees who experienced incivility or discrimination reported a significantly higher need for psychosocial mentoring. Mentoring in Academia 15

References

Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L, Lentz, E., & Lima, L. (2004). Career benefits associated

with mentoring for protégés: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 127-

136.

Alvarez, A. N., Blume, A. W., Cervantes, J. M., & Thomas, L. R. (2009). Tapping the wisdom

tradition: Essential elements to mentoring students of color. Professional Psychology:

Research and Practice, 40, 181 - 188.

Andersson, L. M. & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the

workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452-471.

Aryee, S. & Chay, Y. W. (1994). An examination of the impact of career-oriented mentoring on

work commitment attitudes and career satisfaction among professional managerial

employees. British Journal of Management, 5, 241-249.

Bernstein, B. L., & Russo, N. F. (2008). Explaining too few women in STEM careers: A

psychosocial perspective. In M. Paludi (Ed.), The psychology of women at work:

Challenges and solutions for our female workfoce, Vol 2: Obstacles and the identity

juggle (pp. 1-33). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.

Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the

workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64–80.

Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women

in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75,

539-546. Mentoring in Academia 16

Dreher, G. F., & Cox, T. H., Jr. (1996). Race, gender, and opportunity: A study of compensation

attainment and the establishment of mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 81, 297-308.

Fagenson, E. A. (1992). Mentoring: Who needs it? A comparison of protégés and non-proteges

needs for power, achievement, affiliation, and autonomy. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 41, 48-60.

Ferriman, K., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Work preferences, life values, and personal

views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental

changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 517-532.

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype

content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and

competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878-902.

Gardiner, M., Tiggemann, M., Kearns, H., & Marshall, K. (2007). Show me the money! An

empirical analysis of mentoring outcomes for women in academia. Higher Education

Research and Development, 26, 425-442.

Gonzales-Figueroa, E., & Young, A. M. (2005). Ethnic identity and mentoring among Latinas in

professional roles. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 11, 213-226.

Johnson, W. B. (2007). On being a mentor: A guide for higher education faculty. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jones, G. E. (1997). Advancement opportunity issues for persons with disabilities. Human

Resource Management Review, 7, 55-76.

Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books. Mentoring in Academia 17

Kram, K. E. (1983). Phases of the mentor relationship. Academy of Management Journal, 26,

608-625.

Kram, K. E. (1988) Mentoring at Work: Developmental Relationships in Organizational Life.

Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Levitin, T., Quinn, R. P., & Staines, G. L. (1971). Sex discrimination against the American

working woman. American Behavioral Scientist, 15, 237-254.

Lim, S. & Cortina, L. M. (2005). Interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace: The interface and

impact of general incivility and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90,

483-496.

McKeen, C., & Bujaki, M. (2007). Gender and mentoring: Issues, effects, and opportunities. In

B. R. Ragins & K. E. Kram (Eds.), The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory,

research, and practice (pp. 197-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Nolan, S. A., Buckner, J. P., Marzabadi, C. H., & Kuck, V. J. (2008). Training and mentoring of

chemists: A study of gender disparity. Sex Roles, 58, 235-250.

Ortiz-Walters, R., & Gilson, L. L. (2005). Mentoring in academia: An examination of the

experiences of proteges of color. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 459-475.

Polander, E. The importance of perceived similarity within faculty-faculty mentoring dyads.

Unpublished manuscript.

Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1993). Gender and willingness to mentor in organizations.

Journal of Management, 19, 97-111.

Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of men and

women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology,

84, 529-550. Mentoring in Academia 18

Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1994). Gender differences in expected outcomes of mentoring

relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 957-971.

Ramaswami, A., Dreher, G. F., Bretz, R., & Wiethoff, C. (2010). Gender, mentoring, and career

success: The importance of organizational context. Personnel Psychology, 63, 385-405.

Russell, J. E. A., & Adams, D. M. (1997). The changing nature of mentoring in organizations:

An introduction to the special issue on mentoring in organizations. Journal of Vocational

Behavior, 51, 1-14.

Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical investigation. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 13, 169-174.

Settles, I. H., Cortina, L. M., Stewart, A. J., & Malley, J. (2007). Voice matters: Buffering the

impact of a negative climate for women in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31,

270-281.

Wanberg, C. R., Welsh, E. T., & Hezlett, S. A. (2003). Mentoring research: A review and

dynamic process model. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 22,

39-124.

Witt Smith, J., Smith, W, J., & Markham, S. E. (2000). Diversity issues in mentoring academic

faculty. Journal of Career Development, 26, 251-262. Mentoring in Academia 19

Table 1

Need for Mentoring Items

To what extent do you think you would benefit from having a mentor provide one or more of the following for you?

Career-related mentoring

Expand my network by introducing me to important people

Assist me with preparing for advancement (e.g., promotion, leadership)

Assist me with getting my work published (e.g., conduct friendly reviews)

Assist me with obtaining the resources I need

Advocate for me

Assist me with securing grants

Coach me on developing a national reputation

Assist me with teaching issues

Assist me with managing service responsibilities

Psychosocial mentoring

Assist me with department politics

Offer suggestions to me on how to balance work and non-work (e.g., family)

Role model mentoring

Serve as a role model.

Mentoring in Academia 20

Table 2

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations among the Study Variables

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 M 0.36 9.96 2.00 1.13 0.52 2.90 2.97 3.03 2.02 2.03 SD 0.48 8.37 0.00 0.34 0.50 1.35 1.25 1.14 0.92 4.49 1. Tenure Status1 0.53 0.50 - .54** -- -.10 -.11 -.29** -.30** -.30** .18** .12* 2. Years at A&M 13.36 11.18 -.26** - -- -.14* .09 -.41** -.36** -.36** -.38** .09 3. Sex2 1.36 0.48 .08* -.23** ------4. Ethnicity3 1.10 0.30 .09* -.17** .08* - -.03 .18** .17** .21** .20** .01 5. STEM 0.63 0.48 -.34** .13** -.17** -.06 - .02 .00 .03 .03 .06 6. Role Model 2.63 1.39 -.38** -.41** .15** .15** -.02 - .70** .81** .81** .05 7. PsycSoc 2.61 1.29 -.37** -.43** .22** .19** -.08 .77** .79 .86** .91** .16* 8. Career Ment 2.77 1.21 -.38** -.41** .17** .19** -.05 .84** .89** .96 .99** .10 9. Uncivil WB 1.86 0.82 .09** .06 .17** .03 -.09 .02 .14** .05 .92 .56** 10. Discrim 1.51 4.28 .05 .04 .09* .09* -.04 -.01 .09* .04 .48** .91

Note. Coefficient alphas reported along the diagonal for the full sample. Correlations below the diagonal are for the full sample (n = 742). Correlations above the diagonal are for women only (n =

280). 1 0 = non-tenure track or tenure-track, 1 = tenured; 2 1 men, 2 = women, 3 0 = white, 1 = minority,

Role Model = role modeling mentoring, PsycSoc = Psychosocial mentoring, Career Ment = Career- related mentoring, Uncivil WB = uncivil work behavior, Discrim = Discrimination.