Abstract:

The distribution of men and women in different areas and fields of science presents striking differences. When choosing what to study at university, male students request more of some particular degrees, while women request more of others. Once they finish university and enter the job market, the same proportion in the distribution of sexes is not always maintained, not to mention the positions in the professional hierarchy that women and men reach. There are certain sectors where men practically dominate senior positions.

Numerous researchers have widely addressed this phenomenon. There is a traditional tendency to reduce the explanation to the existence of a personal preference for specific fields of science. This preference is genuine for each individual and relates to their physiological sex or social gender. Reducing weight from this once hegemonic approach, more recent research places emphasis on the Pygmalion and Galatean effects: Students, when making their decisions about what to study, feel influenced by the expectations that others or they have about their potential and those studies that “are for boys” or “are for girls.”

This study aims to question the impact of traditional storytelling on students’ choice of studies and gender stereotypes. It also seeks to highlight the potential of current narratives to present a more diverse and unprejudiced scenario in terms of gender. These new narratives encourage individuals to make vocational and genuine study and career choices, thereby challenging traditional gender stereotypes. Furthermore, it explores the potential of this discourse to promote gender equality in the context of our post-digital society.

Methodologically, the study is based on a sample of ten storytelling campaigns to celebrate the International Day of Women and Girls in Science. The content analysis method serves to identify, among other categories, the type of institutions that participate, the professions represented, the symbols associated with those professions, and the channels used to distribute the message. It also describes the interaction and echoes those campaigns had in the transmedia context of the digital society.

The results of this study are significant, as they demonstrate a concerted effort to dismantle traditionally consolidated symbols that have influenced academic gender preferences and unequal professional positions. Those symbols have often relegated women to lower positions. In contrast, the study advocates for specific counterexamples in areas traditionally considered masculine, such as astrophysics, aerospace engineering, and the astronaut profession. These counterexamples are supported by real data that show equal success in careers where women and men advance by working as a team.

Among the conclusions, the persuasive function that post-digital storytelling fulfills in raising awareness of educational and social interest issues stands out. Gen Alpha is predominantly permeable to this immersive media strategy in which messages use a narrative logic and hybridize numerous interests: educational, social, institutional, or commercial, among others.

Future research proposes to identify the correlation between this type of campaign and the study choices made by Gen Alpha students.

Keywords:

Post-digital storytelling, Gender Equality, Education, Gen Alpha, Gender Sterotypes, Transmedia Strategy.