The number of working women is constantly increasing and becoming more significant (75.9% of men and 64.3% of women in Europe EU-28, 2015); this has been reflected in the current sensitivity towards the presence of a gender dimension in the applied field of politics (i.e., European politics of Research & Innovation) and regulations on Occupational Health. However, this gender dimension has not been accurately paralleled or included in Occupational Health Psychology (OHP), either in the fields of experimental research or intervention.
From a theoretical perspective, there seems to be a clear need to consider gender effects on how OHP issues are experienced, expressed, defined, and addressed. However, prior results on workplace stress/health and gender have been inconsistent, which might explain the scarcity in psychosocial health assessment and interventions that consider gender approach. Thus, this Research Topic aims to go one step further by means of integrating different contributions from OHP beside other related fields (i.e., management, sociology, education).
In this Research Topic, we aim to curate a collection of 15 submissions (minimum), from scholars and practitioners representative of current trends and advances who consider and investigate the role of gender in workplace health, from theory to practice. Consequently, it will observe health from a holistic view considering individual, (non)work, social, and organizational variables that influence women’s and men’s psychosocial health in a similar/different way at work, covering methodological and intervention issues that will shed new insights regarding this theme. Also, we welcome papers that go beyond sex differences to address gender issues (i.e., gender identity, gender roles, gender role segregation) that might be affecting women’s and men’s health.
We encourage submissions that pertain to one of the following areas, but any submissions that may in-crease the knowledge of women’s and men’s health at work are welcome.
1. Empirical work examining interventions focused on fighting against horizontal segregation (e.g. women in Science, Technology, Engineering, Math; and men in traditionally feminine jobs, e.g. Nursing, Primary Education, Psychology), including but not limited to career choice and success, workplace recruitment, retention, and advancement. Beyond this horizontal segregation, we also welcome submissions focused on vertical segregation (e.g. women in top-echelon and leader jobs) and work/nonwork issues.
2. New theoretical and methodological directions that provide a framework for continued under-standing of the psychosocial processes that affect women’s and men’s occupational health, especially theories that view the issue as a complex, multi-level system including the effect of gender roles, and gender related risks (e.g. sexual harassment, tokenism).
3. Critical reviews of the literature, identifying gaps in the understanding of women’s and men’s occupational health, explanations of contradictory results, and how to increase understanding. These reviews could focus on problems that are theoretical, methodological, etc.
4. Case studies describing interventions that have improved the representation of women in traditionally masculine jobs or men in traditionally feminine ones, as well as those that have included and tested new tools to assess work risks/health from a gender perspective.
The number of working women is constantly increasing and becoming more significant (75.9% of men and 64.3% of women in Europe EU-28, 2015); this has been reflected in the current sensitivity towards the presence of a gender dimension in the applied field of politics (i.e., European politics of Research & Innovation) and regulations on Occupational Health. However, this gender dimension has not been accurately paralleled or included in Occupational Health Psychology (OHP), either in the fields of experimental research or intervention.
From a theoretical perspective, there seems to be a clear need to consider gender effects on how OHP issues are experienced, expressed, defined, and addressed. However, prior results on workplace stress/health and gender have been inconsistent, which might explain the scarcity in psychosocial health assessment and interventions that consider gender approach. Thus, this Research Topic aims to go one step further by means of integrating different contributions from OHP beside other related fields (i.e., management, sociology, education).
In this Research Topic, we aim to curate a collection of 15 submissions (minimum), from scholars and practitioners representative of current trends and advances who consider and investigate the role of gender in workplace health, from theory to practice. Consequently, it will observe health from a holistic view considering individual, (non)work, social, and organizational variables that influence women’s and men’s psychosocial health in a similar/different way at work, covering methodological and intervention issues that will shed new insights regarding this theme. Also, we welcome papers that go beyond sex differences to address gender issues (i.e., gender identity, gender roles, gender role segregation) that might be affecting women’s and men’s health.
We encourage submissions that pertain to one of the following areas, but any submissions that may in-crease the knowledge of women’s and men’s health at work are welcome.
1. Empirical work examining interventions focused on fighting against horizontal segregation (e.g. women in Science, Technology, Engineering, Math; and men in traditionally feminine jobs, e.g. Nursing, Primary Education, Psychology), including but not limited to career choice and success, workplace recruitment, retention, and advancement. Beyond this horizontal segregation, we also welcome submissions focused on vertical segregation (e.g. women in top-echelon and leader jobs) and work/nonwork issues.
2. New theoretical and methodological directions that provide a framework for continued under-standing of the psychosocial processes that affect women’s and men’s occupational health, especially theories that view the issue as a complex, multi-level system including the effect of gender roles, and gender related risks (e.g. sexual harassment, tokenism).
3. Critical reviews of the literature, identifying gaps in the understanding of women’s and men’s occupational health, explanations of contradictory results, and how to increase understanding. These reviews could focus on problems that are theoretical, methodological, etc.
4. Case studies describing interventions that have improved the representation of women in traditionally masculine jobs or men in traditionally feminine ones, as well as those that have included and tested new tools to assess work risks/health from a gender perspective.
