The following article appeared in IEEE Expert, Vol. 7, No.
4, August 1992. Copyright 1992 by the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. All rights
reserved.  It is being distributed electronically by
permission.

---------------------------------------

WOMEN IN AI
Researched and written by Dale Strok
Staff Editor, IEEE Expert

     Recently, a woman whose article had been accepted for
IEEE Expert asked us to use her initials rather than her
first name in her byline. She believed that if the readers
knew a woman had done the research, they would question the
validity of the work.
     We were surprised. Although we were aware of recent
studies that showed how much women are underrepresented and
sometimes undervalued in science and engineering, we had
thought that AI - as a relatively young subfield of computer
science - might be an exception.
     After looking at the proportion of women authors in
IEEE Expert over the last four years (about 13 percent), we
decided to take a closer look at the field.

---------------------------------------

     Most of us acknowledge a perceived underrepresentation
of women in science and engineering, whether or not we agree
a problem really exists. Ellen Spertus started her 1991
report "Why Are There So Few Female Computer Scientists?"
with these statistics:
     "In the most recent years for which statistics are
available, women received a third of the bachelor's degrees
in computer science, 27 percent of master's degrees, and 13
percent of PhDs. Not only do women make up just 7.8 percent
of computer science and computer engineering faculties, only
2.7 percent of tenured professors are female. Even worse,
these numbers seem to be improving only very slowly or even
dropping."1
     Other publications have also reported discrepancies in
the treatment of women and men in computer science and
engineering:1-7
     -- Women scientists earn less than men at every stage
of their careers, and the disparity grows at the highest
levels of experience.2
     -- Starting salaries are the same for men and women
engineers, but the gap widens after about six years.3
     -- Women's colleges produce four times as many female
research scientists and scholars as do coeducational
institutions, and their graduates are twice as likely to
earn PhDs.3
     The Computing Research Association's 1989 Taulbee
Survey9 found that the percentage of female computer
scientists decreases rapidly from high-school level to
undergraduate, to graduate, to professorships, and that 13
percent of computer scientists are women and minorities.
Only 4 percent of full professors and 10 percent of
assistant and associate professors in computer science are
women. Some schools have much higher percentages; at the
University of Massachusetts at Amherst, for example, women
account for 18 percent of the full professors.
     We decided to see how women are doing in AI, a
relatively young field.8 We were deluged with offers by both
senior and junior AI women to talk about their problems and
successes, but while everyone was happy to talk openly about
their interests and achievements, no one wanted to be quoted
about gender-related obstacles they've met. A few said
they'd lose their jobs if they spoke on the record; the
discussion of individual problems is therefore anonymous.
However, we also highlight the work of a handful of the
dozens of scientists interviewed, who communicate their
excitement about the future, their commitment to quality
work, and their desire to encourage more women to choose AI
as a career.


IS AI DIFFERENT?

     We started by looking at at the representation of women
in AI publications and conferences. While these statistics
do not necessarily indicate what proportion of AI scientists
overall are women, they do provide a context for examining
how women are faring generally in AI. Women represented
     -- 10 percent of the program committee members at 25
AI-related conferences over the last three years;
     -- 8 percent of the invited speakers at seven AI-
related conferences;
     -- 9 percent of the principal presenters at AAAI '91
and '92, and 11 percent at the Canadian AI '92 conference;
     -- 9 percent of the editorial-board members of 17 AI
journals and magazines.
     -- 9 percent of the authors in IEEE Expert, Artificial
Intelligence, and AI Magazine combined over the last four
years;
     -- an average of 9 percent of the authors in five other
domain-specific journals and transactions, ranging from 4
percent (in pattern analysis and machine intelligence) to 37
percent (in user modeling);
     -- about 25 percent of AAAI's executive councillors;
and
     -- about 8 percent of AAAI fellows.
     The representation of women in academic institutions
varies tremendously, and the numbers mean different things
at different institutions (0 out of 4 isn't the same as 0
out of 40). Many computer science departments have no female
professors, while one has more women than men. It was
impossible to count the percentage of women among AI
graduate students, since schools handle these numbers
differently. However, a few reported that around 10-15
percent of their computer science graduate students are
women, and that the number of female applicants has
decreased in the last two years.
     The women we interviewed pointed to a particular aspect
of AI that might have reduced the number of women in the
field. A necessary part of early AI research was Lisp.
Working with Lisp required Lisp machines, which were only
found at the first and few schools involved in AI, expensive
schools like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Stanford University, and Carnegie Mellon University. A small
group of men at these institutions were thus the first
members of AI's "inner circle." AI has recently been applied
to other, less expensive platforms, and the inner circle's
proteges (and their students) have begun to spread out to
other private and public schools across the country. Yet
many still feel on the outside of the circle.
     One senior interviewee characterized these early years
of AI as "far out" and its adherents, struggling to earn
credibility, as arrogant. "It was like a frontier
atmosphere: it drew people who could compete and go out on a
limb without being right. This usually isn't women. The
women who 'made' it were the ones who had
advisors in the original inner circle. Besides, early on,
more women than men were horrified by the idea of building a
machine as intelligent as people."
     But as AI has since developed, some women now see it as
a "natural" place for their research: "AI has more cognitive
aspects than does computer science. Since women are
generally more introspective, attuned to psychology, and
more verbal than men, AI has a natural draw." Another woman
who believes there are more women in AI than in computer
science said it's because AI is a newer field "with less
baggage," so it offers good careers with fewer stereotypes.
Other women noted the "scruffiness" of AI and its
connections to "softer" sciences like education and
psychology. On the other hand, the stereotypes often break
down: One woman noted that her female natural-language
colleagues come from heavy math and linguistics backgrounds.


OBSTACLES

     So what do these AI scientists say about their careers
and the environments they've worked in?

Small numbers.
     One woman likes the unbalanced percentages between
genders. She is used to working with men and admits the
ratio gives her more visibility, with more positive than
negative repercussions: "People remember me much more than
if I were a man." On the other hand, she noted that some men
claim reverse discrimination, where women have received what
they consider undeserved awards.
     She also said, "The women in the department are not
particularly close, partly because there is such a small
selection of us...The chances are small that we will find
other women that we really want to be close with...Also, I
think that most of us women are pretty strong and have
learned how to survive without a support network. That's not
to say it wouldn't be nice to have one, but I don't think
there's a lot of interest-as long as life is not terrible
for women, [we] might as well just get science (or one's
private life) done, instead of meeting about being women in
science."
     Another woman commented, "During my many years of
study, I came in contact with one female professor -- first-
year music. I had no role models. In fact I was often the
only woman in my class. I was the only female PhD in my
program and for many years the only female faculty member in
my department."
     From another: "I had few female peers and fewer female
professors in graduate school. The ones who 'made it' didn't
have the time nor often the inclination to help younger
female precolleagues."
     And from a leader: "I have a selfish motivation in
wanting more women to participate in the field. When a group
wants a woman to give a speech, I am often the one called. I
need to have others share the work load."
     Many women raised the issue of tokenism. "I don't like
being the sole person fighting a battle...There is a
critical mass needed in both race and gender: You need about
one-third representation before you escape from tokenism.
Lower than this, it's hard to keep good female workers."

Stereotypes.
     Women talked about experiences with stereotyping
throughout their educational years, at work, in the texts
they read, and in gender-biased reviewing.

-- In education. When a male researcher sent us names of
potential interviewees, he commented, "It is unfortunate
that more women don't enter the field, a failure I attribute
to poor, gender-biased education in our secondary schools."
     One woman described her all-girls' high school and the
stereotyping that its all-female staff passed on to their
students: "My math teacher, who had a master's degree in
mathematics, advised me against majoring in math in college,
saying the subject was too difficult for girls."
     Another woman commented, "My graduating class in
undergraduate school had 300 men and three women. This
environment taught me to be independent and stand up for
myself. Since gender discrimination, when present, was
rather open, I could talk about it to my teachers and argue
that I ought to be given a chance. Most of them reconciled
themselves to the situation (which broke their stereotype of
women) by not acknowledging the fact that I was a woman. I
was promoted to being an 'honorary man.'"
     Another talked about the stereotype she was subjected
to while in graduate school. "I had this 'Mom' feeling, that
I didn't belong there. Three of us were in our 30s with
children. Most of the others were younger, with no families.
My adviser called me 'Mom' the whole time I was there. And
people tended not to talk to me about substantive issues
when I had to have my baby with me at school."
     Another said, "I cannot remember receiving support from
anyone as a student. In fact I remember quite the
opposite-discouragement. About half way through my PhD, I
became pregnant-obviously not a common occurrence among my
costudents, who were all male, or the all-male faculty. They
assumed I would drop out of the program. I also had little
support from my family, none of whom had gone through
college and could not understand my desire to continue my
education. Fortunately, I try all the harder when people
assume I cannot do something."

-- In publishing. One interviewee's experiences seem to
correlate with the IEEE Expert author who was worried about
her byline: "I've had two papers rejected-I used my first
name in both. I've had three accepted, and I used only my
initials in those. So now I submit papers with initials
only; it doesn't hurt, just in case."
     Gender-biased language annoys several of the people we
spoke to. While it may seem trivial to some, these women
said it distracts them from their work. One said, "In the AI
linguistics class, we found sexism in all the example
sentences. For example, the active person was always male:
'John kicked the ball.' Women sometimes appeared in the
passive role: 'Bill threw the book at Jane.' The one
exception was 'Mary mended the sock.' Many of the women in
the department were incensed at this, because it is
blatantly sexist, totally unnecessary, and easily avoided.
If AI is to attract and keep women's respect and interest,
this sort of thing should be tackled first."

-- At work. Two women mentioned problems at work with
"wallpaper" backgrounds in graphical user interfaces: "My
colleagues just don't get it-why I'm uncomfortable with
seminude Windows displays." In a similar vein, another said,
"I'm fed up with the alias 'gradstuds' on the network, and
nongender-neutral language. This kind of politics saps my
energy away from my research."
     One professor described a contentious work environment.
When she disagreed with some of her male colleagues, they
told her she doesn't know how to be a wife or a professor.
She believes they would never talk to her like that if she
were male, or shout at her as they have. Taking any
disagreement with a woman very personally, they get angry
easily.

Two-body problems.
     Interviewees often raised dual-career issues, often
called "two-body problems," which are no different for
people in AI than in any other field. "When I was in grad
school, my husband was a postdoctoral fellow at another
university, so we met on weekends. When we got jobs in the
Northeast, we were still 180 miles apart. Finally, after
three years of separation, I got a job near him and will be
moving there. All dual-career couples have to face this
problem."
     Another feels both insecure in her job and "stuck,"
since her husband has tenure: "If I were not happy, I
couldn't do anything about it." They have both compromised
their careers and personal lives: After living apart for
years, they left good jobs and had to build new careers.
     A leader in the field said she has benefitted from the
fact that her husband is also in AI. He not only understands
what she is doing but supports her efforts and values her
achievements. Many women don't have the male support she
does.

Parenting.
     Many of our interviewees are mothers as well as
scientists. One has three children, and twins on the way.
Having worked in industry, she recently finished her PhD.
She has found both supportive and unsupportive advisors and
managers of both sexes; those with children understood
parental pressures and therefore were more supportive.
Despite her busy schedule, she is involved in local
professional-society activities as well as Girl Scouts.
     Another said she had her child by Caesarean section and
was back at work in two weeks, because her employer would
not allow any more time off.
     Asked about her daily schedule, a well-known researcher
said, "I work every waking hour." 60- to 80-hour work weeks
occur regularly in all scientific disciplines, she said, and
she expects this pattern holds for many people through the
tenure and promotion years. Science and parenting leave no
time to do anything else, such as sports or exercise. She
said she feels like a field marshall handling logistics and
replanning, or a juggler with plates in the air.
     Another interviewee has to contend with long commutes.
She said, "I live three hours from my graduate school so
that I can live with my husband and child. I put up with
many hours of travel and expensive child care."
     "There is no good time to have a family," commented
another researcher. "Life never gets easier (well, maybe
during retirement...) Few women who get pregnant in the
middle of their studies finish their PhDs, but plenty of men
get PhDs while their wives have children. Many women have
children first and then go for a PhD...I doubt whether there
is much chance for a close family life if both parents are
in academia."
     One woman with small children advised other mothers to
accept the fact that work comes before family sometimes and
that family comes before work sometimes. Unfortunately, the
children always get sick just as some deadline is looming at
work.
     On the other hand, one woman said that having two
children did not interrupt her career at all. She was able
to continue to work full time, getting adequate support at
home and at work.

Social interaction.
     Candy Sidner, a AAAI fellow and a member of the
research staff at Digital's Cambridge Research Laboratory,
talked on the record about the differences between working
in a place with few female peers and a place where women
comprise a sizable proportion, a "critical mass." Her lab
has six women among 22 principal researchers, enough to
change the environment, including how people interact and
treat each other. She explained, "I think men have a hard
time collaborating with women (in either research or general
lab activities) until there are enough women around that
they feel comfortable and have productive expectations of
women colleagues. When you have a bunch of women colleagues,
you usually find more than one you respect, and it changes
your perception of the whole group!... When enough women are
around, the fraternity atmosphere becomes a society, a
community." Sidner also believes that women value consensus
more than do men, and that they compete with and critique
others differently. She attributes such differences to
socialized skills learned in childhood, and she sees the
same forces at work today in her nine-year-old daughter's
experiences.
     Another woman said, "When I first started, my research
group consisted of older students, including two women.
Later, younger men joined, and I was the only woman. The
character definitely became much more of a 'male banter'
style of interaction-which I really disliked."
     Another woman commented on the banter: "It has grated
more and more on my nerves to hear some of the stuff guys
think they can dish out. Many of the male TAs joke (or even
say seriously) that they make female students go out with
them for grades. Male friends tell me about jokes they make
with male professors about women in or out of the
department...I have heard many guys make comments like 'The
women on the faculty are technically far below the males,'
which is patently not true by any objective
measurement...Male friends think that in the name of
friendship they can be as coarse or vulgar or make as
outrageously sexist statements as they like; I think they do
this more for shock value than anything else. None of this
is particularly terrible, but can get annoying after the