{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022556390977443608, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.3652173913043475, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 1, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Assessing "Readiness to Embrace Diversity": An Application of the Trans-Theoretical Model of Behavioral Change

We apply the Transtheoretical Model of intentional behavioral change to the behavior of “embracing diversity” at a major research University. We use survey methods to ask individuals questions about the existence of a problem in their environments, whether their units are investigating ways to solve the problem, and whether their units have taken action. We then aggregate the responses of individuals to create a department-level measure of “readiness to embrace diversity” in the department. We find that faculty at this University appear to be taking action on problems of gender and racial/ethnic diversity in their departments, even while denying the existence of the problems. Women faculty appear to be more aware of diversity-related problems in their departments (both for women and for minorities), and they are less optimistic than men that their units are investigating the problems or taking action. Humanities and Social Science departments appear to be farther along towards “embracing diversity” than are departments in the Biological and Physical sciences, and all departments appear to be more aware of issues surrounding racial/ethnic diversity than gender diversity on the dimensions about which we asked (hiring, climate, and leadership.) Limitations of the methods used are discussed, as well as future directions for research.