INCLUSION IN THE RECORDING STUDIO?
EXAMINING POPULAR SONGS
USC ANNENBERG INCLUSION INITIATIVE
@Inclusionists
FEMALES ARE MISSING IN POPULAR MUSIC
22.7
21.9
20.9
25.1
28.1
16.8
Prevalence of Female Artists across 700 Songs, in percentages
RATIO OF MALES TO FEMALES
3.6:1
TOTAL NUMBER
OF ARTISTS
1,455
© 2019 DR. STACY L. SMITH
17.1
FOR FEMALES, MUSIC IS A SOLO ACTIVITY
Across 700 songs, percentage of females out of...
31.5
INDIVIDUAL
ARTISTS
DUOS BANDS
21.7
ALL
ARTISTS
4.6 7.5
47
to
1
THE RATIO OF MALE TO FEMALE PRODUCERS
ACROSS 400 POPULAR SONGS IS
FEMALES ARE PUSHED ASIDE AS PRODUCERS
‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 ‘17 ‘18
0
30
60
© 2019 DR. STACY L. SMITH
FEMALES
MALES
WRITTEN OFF: FEW FEMALES WORK AS SONGWRITERS
Songwriter gender by year...
2012 2014 2017
89%
11%
87.3%
12.7%
87.7%
12.3%
TOTAL
87.8%
12.2%
2013 20162015 2018
88.3%
11.7%
86.3%
13.7%
86.7%
13.3%
88.5%
11.5%
38.4
30.7
35.1
48.7 48.4
51.9
55.6
44%
OF ARTISTS WERE
PEOPLE OF COLOR
ACROSS SONGS
FROM
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Percentage of artists of color by year...
VOICES HEARD: ARTISTS OF COLOR ACROSS SONGS
Percentage of women across three creative roles
WOMEN ARE MISSING IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY
.%
ARE
ARTISTS
.%
ARE
SONGWRITERS
.%
ARE
PRODUCERS
© 2019 DR. STACY L. SMITH
2017
2015
TOTAL
1.8%
98.2%
1.8%
98.2%
2.1%
97.9%
CREATIVE CONSTRAINTS: FEW FEMALE PRODUCERS WORK IN MUSIC
2012
2.4%
97.6%
2018
2.3%
97.7%
8714
PRODUCERS WERE
WOMEN OF COLOR
OUT OF
WOMEN OF COLOR ARE INVISIBLE AS PRODUCERS
20
35
50
65
80
40%
33%
73%
52%
Percentage of underrepresented male and female artists by year...
MEN AND WOMEN OF COLOR CLIMB THE CHARTS
Female
Male
‘12 ‘13 ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 ‘17 ‘18
0
25
50
75
100
© 2019 DR. STACY L. SMITH
CREDITS & DEFICITS: MALES OUTPACE FEMALES IN SONGWRITING
Martin Sandberg (Max Martin)
Aubrey Graham (Drake)
Henry Walter (Cirkut)
Lukasz Gottwald (Dr. Luke)
Savan Kotecha
Johan Schuster (Shellback)
Dijon McFarlane (DJ Mustard)
Michael Williams (Mike WILL Made-it)
THE TOP MALE
WRITER HAS
39
Onika Maraj (Nicki Minaj)
Katheryn Hudson (Katy Perry)
Adele Adkins
Sia Furler
Selena Gomez
Robyn Fenty (Rihanna)
Belcalis Almanzar (Cardi B)
Taylor Swift
Benjamin Levin (Benny Blanco)
39
33
24
22
21
19
18
15
14
18
14
12
9
8
8
8
7
Leading male and female songwriters by number of credits...
CREDITS
THE TOP FEMALE
WRITER HAS
18
CREDITS
ACROSS 700 POPULAR
SONGS FROM
2012-2018
The top 10 male songwriters are responsible for 23% of the 700 most popular songs from 2012 to 2018.
Top Male Songwriters
# of
credits
Top Female Songwriters
# of
credits
10.4%
OF GRAMMY
®
NOMINEES
FROM 2013-2019
WERE FEMALE.
89.6% WERE MALE.
THE GENDER GAP AT THE GRAMMYS
®
IS REAL
Percentage of Female Nominees by Category, 2013-2019
93.4 79.491.8
Record of
the Year
Album of
the Year
Song of
the Year
Best New
Artist
58.9 97.4
Producer
of the Year
6.6 20.68.2 41.1 2.6
Female
Adam Levine 14
Brittany Hazzard (Starrah) 8
Male
© 2019 DR. STACY L. SMITH
BARRIERS FACING FEMALES IN MUSIC
25%
WERE THE
ONLY WOMAN
28%
WERE
DISMISSED
20%
NOTED DRUGS
& ALCOHOL
39%
WERE
OBJECTIFIED
WHAT HAPPENS TO WOMEN IN THE RECORDING STUDIO?
Experiences of 75 songwriters and producers
STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS TO FOSTER SYSTEMIC CHANGE
SHE
IS THE
MUSIC
P&E
INCLUSION
INITIATIVE
SPOTIFY EQL
RESIDENCY
PROGRAM
SET TARGET
INCLUSION
GOALS
FOR THE
RECORD
COLLECTIVE
MENTORSHIP
PROGRAMS
INCLUSION
RIDER
COLLECTIVE
ACTION
43%
39%
36%
40%
19%
Skills
Discounted
Stereotyped
& Sexualized
Male-Dominated
Industry
Navigating
the Industry
Financial
Instability
Experiences of 75 songwriters and producers
Inclusion in the Recording Studio?
Gender & Race/Ethnicity of Artists, Songwriters, & Producers
across 700 Popular Songs from 2012-2018
Dr. Stacy L. Smith, Marc Choueiti, Dr. Katherine Pieper, Hannah Clark, Ariana Case, & Sylvia Villanueva
Annenberg Inclusion Initiative
USC
with assistance from Angel Choi, Kevin Yao and Adaeze Ene
The aim of this study was to examine the quantitative and qualitative realities of working in the recording
studio. Quantitatively, we assessed gender and race/ethnicity of artists, songwriters, and producers on
the Hot 100 year-end Billboard Charts from 2012-2018. Grammy® nominees over the same time frame
were also reviewed, focusing on demographics within the following categories: record of the year, album
of the year, song of the year, best new artist, and producer of the year. Qualitatively, the investigation
takes a deeper dive into barriers and opportunities women experience in the recording studio. We
conducted 75 in-depth interviews with female songwriters and producers to gather information on the
impediments they face in music as well as potential solutions to create change.
Artists, Songwriters & Producers on Billboard Charts
Artists
. A full 1,455 artists were credited across the sample of 700 songs. In 2018, 82.9% of artists on the
year end charts were male and 17.1% were female. This computes into a gender ratio of 4.8 male artists
to every one female artist. 2018 (17.1%) was not different from 2017 (16.8%) in terms of female
participation. These two years featured the lowest percentages of females on the Hot 100 list across the
seven years evaluated.
In 2018, females only represented 26.2% of credited solo artists which was not different than 2017 but
was 9.6 percentage points lower than 2012. Not one woman in a duo or band appeared on the Hot 100
chart of 2018. 2018 was substantially lower than 2012 for female participation in duos and bands.
For males, the range of credits was from 1-33. Drake held the top spot with 33 solo credits across the
sample time frame, followed by Justin Bieber (13 songs) and Chris Brown (13 songs). The range of credits
for females was a bit narrower (1-21), with Rihanna the top performer followed by Nicki Minaj (20 songs)
and Taylor Swift (12 songs).
Across 1,455 artists, 56% were white and 44% were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. A
majority of artists (55.6%) on the 2018 charts were people of color which is well above U.S. Census
(39.3%). The percentage of artists of color in 2018 was not different from 2017, but the proportion was
meaningfully higher (>5 percentage points) than 2012 (+17.2) and every other year in the sample.
In 2018, the percentage of women of color on the charts was at a seven year high. A full 73% of female
artists were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in 2018 which is 23 percentage points higher
than 2017 and 40 percentage points higher than 2012. For underrepresented males, 2017 (52%) and
2018 (52%) did not differ. However, the percentage of male artists of color on the charts in 2018 was
significantly higher (12 percentage points) than 2012 (40%).
Songwriters.
A total of 3,330 songwriters were credited on the seven-year sample. A full 87.7% were
males and 12.3% were females. This calculates into a gender ratio of 7.1 male songwriters to every one
female. No changes in the percentage of female songwriters were observed between 2017 (11.5%) and
2018 (12.2%), nor did either of these years vary meaningfully from 2012 (11%).
Of the 411 female songwriters assessed, 43.3% were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups and
56.7% were white. However, marked variation was observed over time. 59.4% of female songwriters
were underrepresented in 2018 which was higher than 2017 (53.5%). Only 29.8% of female songwriters
were women of color in 2012, a percentage substantially lower than 2018.
Differences emerged by gender among the top performing songwriters. The top male songwriter had
over two times as many credits (Max Martin, 39 credits) as the top female songwriter on the year-end
charts (Nicki Minaj, 18 credits). The top 10 male songwriters wrote or co-wrote just under a quarter
(23%) of all songs in the sample.
Out of 633 songs, 48 songs (7.6%) were written by at least one female songwriter who did not work with
a female artist on the song. A total of 90 songs (14.2%) featured at least one female artist and at least one
female songwriter. This is a 6.6 percentage point gain. Female artists may be the key to increasing
women’s access and opportunity to write in the music industry. This is imperative, as females face an
epidemic of invisibility penning songs. Of the 633 songs, 360 or 57% lacked the presence of a female
writer. In stark contrast, only 3 or <1% lacked any male songwriters.
Producers
. Across 400 songs, 871 producers, co producers and vocal producers were credited. 97.9% of
producers were male and only 2.1% were female. There has been no change over the four years
evaluated, with a gender ratio of 47.4 male producers to every one female producer.
We removed the 14 songs that repeated across the charts in the time frame examined (4 years), bringing
the sample to 386. After this, the total number of female producers reduced to 15 individual women and
17 credits. Eleven of these producers were white and 4 were from underrepresented racial/ethnic
groups. Only two women worked twice as producers across the songs evaluated.
Grammys
. 1,064 individuals received a Grammy Award® nomination in 5 select categories from 2013 to
2019. A full 89.6% were male and 10.4% were female, a gender ratio of 8.6 males to every one female.
The percentage of female nominees in 2019 was significantly higher than 2018 and 2013. Despite this,
2018 was not different than 2015 or 2016 in the percentage of women nominated.
While males were the majority of nominees in each category, females were most likely to be nominated
for Best New Artist, followed by Song of the Year. In the Record and Album of the Year categories, fewer
than 10% of nominees were women. For the first time in the seven years analyzed, a woman (Linda Perry)
was nominated for Producer of the Year.
For female nominees, race/ethnicity was analyzed. Overall, 36.9% of female nominees were women of
color. The largest number of underrepresented females received nominations for Album of the Year,
followed by Record of the Year and Best New Artist—the latter category grew by 16.1 percentage points
from last year’s total.
Qualitative Trends
Interviews with 75 female songwriters and producers were conducted to examine the impediments
facing women in the music industry. Spontaneous and prompted answers were analyzed for recurring
themes that pointed to the existence of a career barrier. Below, major findings as well as solutions are
presented.
General Career Barriers.
40% percent of interviewees stated that they face difficulty navigating the
industry, including breaking into the business, making connections, and getting into different rooms.
Second, the financial instability associated with a music career was mentioned by 19% of women. They
described the lack of royalties available to songwriters and producers, the changing nature of the industry
due to streaming services, and the difficulties associated with supporting oneself on the income
generated from songwriting or producing.
Women’s Skills and Abilities are Discounted.
A full 43% of interviewees stated that two main issues
confronted them as songwriters and producers. First, they were dismissed or not taken seriously—their
abilities, competence, and knowledge in the role of songwriter or producer were doubted or were
undercut by their colleagues. A second and related issue was that they had to prove their competence to
individuals who might work with them.
In a separate follow-up question, 92% of women said their leadership or vision had been resisted by a
colleague. Women reported that they were ignored or discounted (43%) such that their contributions
were either not seen as important or not recognized. Nearly one-third (29%) stated that they were
demeaned, or that others argued, embarrassed them or undermined their input. A further 19% said that
women taking on leadership threatened men, while 16% stated that stereotyping about their gender was
used to dismiss their work or their abilities.
Sexualized & Stereotyped.
39% of participants provided spontaneous answers that illuminated that
women’s careers are inextricably tied to expectations about their gender and sexual availability. Women
reported being sexualized (21%), which included being the subject of innuendo, undesired attention,
propositioned, valued for their appearance, and even an awareness or fear of being personally unsafe in
work situations.
Interviewees also answered a question that specifically asked whether any aspect of the environment of
the recording studio had ever made them feel uncomfortable or uneasy. More than three-quarters (83%)
of participants said that they or other women experienced discomfort in the studio. 39% stated that they
had been objectified, and 25% pointed to being the lone female or one of few women in environments
populated by males. Third, 28% were uncomfortable due to having their contributions, knowledge, or
expertise dismissed, or due to facing hostile language from others. Fourth, 20% of interviewees noted
that drugs, alcohol, and sexualized women were part of studio culture. Finally, 11% of respondents
provided other reasons for their uneasiness.
One-quarter (25%) of interviewees spontaneously stated that gender stereotypes guided others’
expectations about their behavior, treatment, or opportunities they were given. The responses in this
category illuminate that simply being a woman in music can serve as a barrier to career success. Across
interview responses, 12% of participants also gave unprompted responses indicating that the qualities
associated with producing were associated with males—and that the job itself was not viewed as
something women could do. In other words, when individuals think producer, they think male.
Male-Dominated Industry.
36% of participants gave unprompted answers regarding a barrier that
occurred as the result of being a statistical minority in the music business. A full 29.3% (n=22) of
interviewees in this category stated that the music industry was male-dominated or functioned as the
proverbial ‘boy’s club.’ This category also included responses (12%, n=9) who stated that there were few
females in songwriting and production, including few female role models, and the handful of responses
(4%, n=3) indicating that women were competitive with each other.
Solutions for Change
The report also highlights several opportunities for creating industry change. These include creating
environments where women are welcome and generating opportunities for women to use their skills and
talents. Other solutions suggested are to ensure that role models and mentorships are available to
women, and for the industry to commit to considering and hiring more women. The report also
illuminates the work of different organizations or initiatives that seek to address the barriers identified in
the study. The goals and activities of She Is The Music, Spotify’s EQL Residency Program, For The Record
Collective, and others are discussed.
Inclusion in the Recording Studio?
Gender & Race/Ethnicity of Artists, Songwriters, & Producers
across 700 Popular Songs from 2012-2018
Dr. Stacy L. Smith, Marc Choueiti, Dr. Katherine Pieper, Hannah Clark, Ariana Case, & Sylvia Villanueva
Annenberg Inclusion Initiative
USC
with assistance from Angel Choi, Kevin Yao and Adaeze Ene
The aim of this study was to examine the quantitative and qualitative realities of working in the recording
studio. Quantitatively, we assessed gender and race/ethnicity of artists, songwriters, and producers on
the Hot 100 year-end Billboard Charts from 2012-2018. Longitudinally, a total of 5,656 credits were
scrutinized for their demographic information. The Grammy® nominees over the same time frame were
also reviewed, focusing on demographics within the following categories: record of the year, album of the
year, song of the year, best new artist, and producer of the year.
Qualitatively, the investigation takes a deeper dive into barriers and opportunities women experience in
the recording studio. We conducted 75 in-depth interviews with female songwriters and producers to
gather information on the impediments they face in music as well as potential solutions to create change.
The interviews were conducted during the summer and fall of 2018 and serve to illuminate the lived
experiences of female artisans in this employment space.
Below, the report features four major sections. First, we overview the current state of the recording
studio by gender and underrepresented racial/ethnic status of artists. Second, we focus on the
Grammys® and representation among nominees. Third, we offer thematic results of our qualitative
interviews with female songwriters and producers regarding their work in the recording studio. The
report concludes with a summary of the major findings and specific solutions for change.
Quantitative Assessment of Artists
Credited artists and songwriters were examined for gender and race/ethnicity across the 700 top songs
from 2012-2018. A subset of this sample (400 songs) was evaluated for producer demographic attributes:
2012, 2015, 2017, and 2018. In this section, we first present the results for 2018 and then provide
comparisons to 2017 and 2012 (on select measures). Only ±5 percentage point differences were
discussed to avoid making noise about meaningless deviations (1-2 percentage points). For information
on our methodology and decision making, please see the footnotes of last year's report.
Gender
. A full 1,455 artists were credited across the sample of 700 songs.
1
In 2018 (see Table 1), 82.9% of
artists on the year end charts were male (n=179) and 17.1% were female (n=37). This computes into a
gender ratio of 4.8 male artists to every one female artist. 2018 (17.1%) was not different from 2017
(16.8%) in terms of female participation. These two years featured the lowest percentages of females on
the Hot 100 list across the seven years evaluated. Such figures are surprising, given that females
comprise 50% of the U.S. population
as well as
roughly half of music buyers and streamers in the
audience.
2
Table 1
Artist Gender by Year
Artist Gender
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
Males
77.3%
(n=153)
78.1%
(n=168)
79.1%
(n=178)
74.9%
(n=146)
71.9%
(n=138)
83.2%
(n=178)
82.9%
(n=179)
78.3%
(n=1,140)
Females
22.7%
(n=45)
21.9%
(n=47)
20.9%
(n=47)
25.1%
(n=49)
28.1%
(n=54)
16.8%
(n=36)
17.1%
(n=37)
21.7%
(n=315)
Gender Ratio
3.4 to 1
3.6 to 1
3.8 to 1
3 to 1
2.5 to 1
4.9 to 1
4.8 to 1
3.6 to 1
Besides gender, we also evaluated
genre
and
performer type
. Focusing first on genre, every song in the
sample was labeled using the iTunes distinction. Then, the genre label was applied across all the
performers and artists on each song.
3
As such, the results are presented at the performer level and not
the song level. Table 2 illuminates that males worked primarily in Pop (35.4%), Hip-Hop/Rap (28.7%) and
Alternative (15.8%). The majority of females worked in Pop (61.6%) and a much lower percentage in Hip-
Hop/Rap (15.2%).
Table 2
Song Genre by Artist Gender
Genre
Males
Females
Gender Ratio
Pop
35.4%
(n=404)
61.6%
(n=194)
2.1 to 1
Hip-Hop/Rap
28.7%
(n=327)
15.2%
(n=48)
6.8 to 1
Alternative
15.8%
(n=180)
5.7%
(n=18)
10 to 1
Country
6.4%
(n=73)
6.7%
(n=21)
3.5 to 1
R&B/Soul
5.4%
(n=62)
2.9%
(n=9)
6.9 to 1
Dance/Electronic
8.3%
(n=94)
7.9%
(n=25)
3.8 to 1
While these findings reflect within gender breakdowns, it is important to look at the chart
share
within
each genre. We did this by looking at the proportion of performing credits held by males and females per
song category. By examining the gender ratio column, it is obvious that male artists dominated every
employment opportunity with ratios ranging from 2 to 1 in Pop (low) to 10 to 1 in Alternative (high).
The
type of credit
was evaluated next. Artists were grouped into individual performers, duos, and bands.
Over half of all artists were individual performers (59.7%, n=869), followed by members of bands (32.9%,
n=478) and duos (7.4%, n=108). Featuring artists on songs were included in this breakdown, within
specific type.
4
In 2018, females only represented 26.2% of credited solo artists which was not different
than 2017 but was 9.6 percentage points lower than 2012 (see Table 3). Not one woman in a duo or band
appeared on the Hot 100 chart of 2018. 2018 does not differ meaningfully from 2017 for females
working in groups. However, 2018 was substantially lower than 2012 for female participation in duos and
bands. Because so few females were featured in duos or bands across the seven-year time line, these
findings should be interpreted with caution.
Table 3
Percentage of Female Artists by Type of Credit
Type of Artist
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
Individual
35.8%
(n=39)
33.3%
(n=37)
35.8%
(n=43)
30.8%
(n=41)
35.2%
(n=43)
25.6%
(n=34)
26.2%
(n=37)
31.5%
(n=274)
Duo
16.7%
(n=1)
10%
(n=2)
0
10%
(n=1)
0
4.5%
(n=1)
0
4.6%
(n=5)
Band
6%
(n=5)
9.5%
(n=8)
4.6%
(n=4)
13.5%
(n=7)
22.9%
(n=11)
1.7%
(n=1)
0
7.5%
(n=36)
Note: Bands refer to any group featuring three or more performers under one moniker. For the percentage of male
artists by year and credit type, subtract the cell percentage from 100. Featuring credits were included within specific
credit type. Columns do not add to 100%.
While the previous analyses focused on all artists, we now turn our attention to how often the
same
performers
appeared across the seven-year sample. To this end, we first had to remove any duplicate
songs that appeared more than once in the sample time frame (n=67). Then, we reduced each performer
to a single line of data and tallied up how many times s/he appeared with a solo or featuring credit. The
total sample of 1,455 artists was reduced by 64% (n=782 repeat appearances). The total number of
individual or unique artists across seven years of Hot 100 charts was 529. Now, we look to see who is
routinely working by gender within credit type (i.e., individual, duo, band).
The results for solo artists can be found in Table 4. Despite being fewer in number, female artists seem to
be punching at the same weight as male artists with one, three, four, and six or more credits across the
sample. The only meaningful differences emerged with males more likely to have two credits than their
female counterparts whereas the opposite trend (females>males) emerged for five credits.
Table 4
Number of Songs by Artists with Solo Credits by Gender
#
of Songs
Male Artists
Female Artists
Total
# of
Artists
%
# of
Artists
%
# of
Artists
%
1
132
57.6%
47
55.9%
179
57.2%
2
36
15.7%
8
9.5%
44
14.1%
3
19
8.3%
9
10.7%
28
8.9%
4
14
6.1%
4
4.8%
18
5.7%
5
4
1.7%
7
8.3%
11
3.5%
≥6
24
10.5%
9
10.7%
33
10.5%
Total
229
100%
84
100%
313
100%
Note: For presentational purposes, the range of 6 or more songs was grouped into one level. Individual artists'
credits were ascertained using their name and/or pseudonym on solo or featuring credits.
However, the range of credits differed by gender. For males, the range of credits was from 1-33 (see
Table 5). Drake held the top spot with 33 solo credits, followed by Justin Bieber (13 songs) and Chris
Brown (13 songs). The range of credits for females was a bit narrower (1-21), with Rihanna the top
performer followed by Nicki Minaj (20 songs) and Taylor Swift (12 songs).
Table 5
Top Individual Artists of Songs by Gender
Top
Males
#
of Songs
Top
Females
#
of Songs
Drake
33
Rihanna
21
Justin Bieber
13
Nicki Minaj
20
Chris Brown
13
Taylor Swift
12
Calvin Harris
11
Ariana Grande
11
Kendrick Lamar
11
Selena Gomez
9
The Weeknd
10
Katy Perry
8
Bruno Mars
9
Cardi B
8
Future
9
Adele
8
Turning to duos, a total of 25 performing pairs were credited across the sample. Twenty one duos were
male only (84%), 12% (n=3) featured a male and female pair and only 1 (4%, i.e., Icona Pop) contained
two female performers. The top performing duo had 7 song credits across seven years (Florida Georgia
Line), followed by The Chainsmokers (5 songs) and Macklemore and Ryan Lewis (5 songs). There were 45
bands in sample, 71.1% (n=32) featured all males, 24.4% involved males and females (n=11), and only two
(4.4%, Fifth Harmony, Pistol Annies) were all females. The top performing bands were Maroon 5 (13
songs), Imagine Dragons and Migos (8 songs each), and One Direction (6 songs).
Taken together, the results of this section reveal pronounced gender differences on the Hot 100 year-
end charts from 2012-2018. While females comprised under a third of individual performers, their
presence in duos and bands was in the single digits. Further, no female within a duo or band appeared
across the 100 top songs of 2018. We now turn our attention to examine another demographic
characteristic on the Billboard year end charts, race/ethnicity.
Race/Ethnicity
. Every artist also was coded as underrepresented or not (white).
5
Across 1,455 artists, 56%
(n=815) were white and 44% (n=640) were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. As shown in
Table 6, a majority of artists (55.6%) on the 2018 charts were underrepresented which is well above U.S.
Census (39.3%).
6
The percentage in 2018 was not different from 2017, but the proportion was
meaningfully higher (>5 percentage points) than 2012 (+17.2) and every other year in the sample.
Table 6
Underrepresented Artists by Year
Performers
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
Not
Underrepresented
61.6%
(n=122)
69.3%
(n=149)
64.9%
(n=146)
51.3%
(n=100)
51.6%
(n=99)
48.1%
(n=103)
44.4%
(n=96)
56%
(n=815)
Underrepresented
38.4%
(n=76)
30.7%
(n=66)
35.1%
(n=79)
48.7%
(n=95)
48.4%
(n=93)
51.9%
(n=111)
55.6%
(n=120)
44%
(n=640)
Total
198
215
225
195
192
214
216
1,455
Similar to gender, we examined how underrepresented status (no, yes) varied with
gender
,
genre
, and
credit type
(individual, duos, bands). The intersection of
gender
and underrepresented status is shown in
Figure 1. In 2018, the percentage of underrepresented females was at a seven year high. A full 73% of
female artists were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in 2018 which is 23 percentage points
higher than 2017 and 40 percentage points higher than 2012. For underrepresented males, 2017 (52%)
and 2018 (52%) did not differ. However, the percentage of underrepresented male artists on the charts in
2018 was significantly higher (12 percentage points) than 2012 (40%).
Figure 1
Underrepresented Male & Female Artists Over Time
Pivoting to
genre
, Table 7 reveals that song type is related to artist underrepresented status.
Underrepresented artists were more likely to be credited with Hip-Hop/Rap or R&B/Soul songs than their
Caucasian peers. White artists were more likely to have songs from Pop, Alternative, Country, and
Dance/Electronic than underrepresented artists.
In addition to gender and genre, we were interested in whether
performer type
was associated with
underrepresented status. As shown in Table 8, the vast majority of solo artists were from
underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in 2018 (70.2%). This percentage does not differ from 2017 but is
substantially higher than 2012 (54.1%). A very different story emerged with duos, with only 20% of
performers underrepresented in 2018 which was significantly lower than 2017 (27.3%) and 2012 (66.7%).
Given small cell sizes, these results should be interpreted cautiously. The percentage of UR band
members was 29.2% in 2018, which was not different than 2017 (30.5%) but higher than 2012 (15.7%).
40%
30%
38%
52%
46%
52%
52%
33%
32%
23%
39%
54%
50%
73%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
UR Males
UR Females
Table 7
Song Genre by Underrepresented Artists
Genre
Underrepresented
Artists
Not Underrepresented
Artists
Pop
32.7%
(n=209)
47.7%
(n=389)
Hip-Hop/Rap
50.2%
(n=321)
6.6%
(n=54)
Alternative
1.4%
(n=9)
23.2%
(n=189)
Country
<1%
(n=3)
11.2%
(n=91)
R&B/Soul
10%
(n=64)
<1%
(n=7)
Dance/Electronic
5.3%
(n=34)
10.4%
(n=85)
Table 8
Percentage of Underrepresented Artists by Credit Type
Credit Type
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
UR Solo
Artists
54.1%
(n=59)
51.3%
(n=57)
52.5%
(n=63)
56.4%
(n=75)
60.7%
(n=74)
65.4%
(n=87)
70.2%
(n=99)
59.1%
(n=514)
UR Artists in
Duos
66.7%
(n=4)
15%
(n=3)
38.9%
(n=7)
70%
(n=7)
18.2%
(n=4)
27.3%
(n=6)
20%
(n=2)
30.6%
(n=33)
UR Artists in
Bands
15.7%
(n=13)
7.1%
(n=6)
10.3%
(n=9)
25%
(n=13)
31.3%
(n=15)
30.5%
(n=18)
29.2%
(n=19)
19.5%
(n=93)
Note: For the percentage of white artists by year and credit type, subtract the cell percentage from 100. Featuring
credits were included within specific credit type.
Table 9
Number of Songs by Underrepresented Artists with Solo Credits
#
of Songs
UR Artists
Not UR Artists
Total
# of
Artists
%
# of
Artists
%
# of
Artists
%
1
96
54.5%
83
60.5%
179
57.2%
2
26
14.8%
18
13.1%
44
14.1%
3
17
9.7%
11
8%
28
8.9%
4
12
6.8%
6
4.4%
18
5.7%
5
7
4%
4
2.9%
11
3.5%
≥6
18
10.2%
15
10.9%
33
10.5%
Total
176
100%
137
100%
313
100%
Note:
For presentational purposes, the range of 6 or more songs was grouped into one level. Individual artists'
credits were ascertained using their name and/or pseudonym on solo or featuring credits.
To look at unique or solo performers, we applied the same sift to the data as noted above with gender. A
total of 313 unique artists worked across 700 songs (see Table 9). One difference emerged in Table 9,
with white artists (60.5%) more likely to have a single credit across the sample than underrepresented
artists (54.5%). Just under a sixth (14.1%) of performers had two credits in the sample, 18.2% had three
to five credits. One-tenth of the artists had six or more credits across seven years.
Table 10
Top Individual Artists by Underrepresented Status
Top
UR Artists
#
of Songs
Top
Not UR Artists
#
of Songs
Drake
33
Justin Bieber
13
Rihanna
21
Taylor Swift
12
Nicki Minaj
20
Ariana Grande
11
Chris Brown
13
Calvin Harris
11
Kendrick Lamar
11
Adele
8
The Weeknd
10
Katy Perry
8
Ed Sheeran
8
The top performing solo artists by underrepresented status can be found in Table 10. The top under-
represented artist was Drake, with 33 songs in the sample time frame. Drake had two and a half times
more solo credits than the top white artist (Justin Bieber, 13 songs). Further, two of the top three
underrepresented artists were women (Rihanna, 21 songs, Nicki Minaj, 20 songs) who also had more hits
than any white artist on the list.
Besides solo credits, we also explored underrepresented artists’ participation in duos and bands. Of the
25 performing pairs, 9 or 36% were underrepresented and 3 (12%) featured underrepresented and white
artists. Just over half of all duos were white (52%). The top performing underrepresented duos were Rae
Sremmurd (4 songs) and LMFAO (2 songs) whereas the top performing white duos were Florida Georgia
Line (7 songs), The Chainsmokers (5 songs), and Macklemore and Ryan Lewis (5 songs).
Of the 45 bands, only 8.9% (n=4) featured all underrepresented members, 14 featured (31.1%) a mix of
underrepresented and white performers and 27 (60%) were white only. The top performers were Maroon
5 (13 songs), Migos (8 songs), and Imagine Dragons (8 songs).
In total, the findings reveal that underrepresented artists dominated a great deal of the Billboard charts.
In 2018 alone, underrepresented performers accounted for over half of the artists on the Hot 100 year-
end chart. Women of color comprised over 70% of female artists in 2018. The top three performers
across the entire study were each from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. Unlike other forms of
entertainment (e.g., TV, film), underrepresented performers are thriving in the music business.
Songwriters & Producers
Songwriters and Producers were also evaluated demographically. Here, we assessed gender for all
content creators and underrepresented status for females only. For songwriters, the full seven-year
sample was evaluated whereas only four years were assessed for producers. Given that so few females
have access and opportunity to produce, a smaller sample was sufficient to establish trends.
Songwriters
. A total of 3,330 songwriters were credited on the seven-year sample.
7
A full 87.7%
(n=2,919) were males and 12.3% (n=411) were females (see Table 11). This calculates into a gender ratio
of 7.1 male songwriters to every one female. No changes in the percentage of females were observed
between 2017 (11.5%) and 2018 (12.2%), nor do either of these years vary meaningfully from 2012
(11%).
Table 11
Songwriter Gender by Year
Writer Gender
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
Males
89%
(n=380)
88.3%
(n=355)
87.3%
(n=404)
86.3%
(n=415)
86.7%
(n=424)
88.5%
(n=445)
87.8%
(n=416)
87.7%
(n=2,919)
Females
11%
(n=47)
11.7%
(n=47)
12.7%
(n=59)
13.7%
(n=66)
13.3%
(n=65)
11.5%
(n=58)
12.2%
(n=69)
12.3%
(n=411)
Gender Ratio
8.1 to 1
7.5 to 1
6.8 to 1
6.3 to 1
6.5 to 1
7.7 to 1
7.2 to 1
7.1 to 1
Note: The gender of three writers was not ascertainable. Another 8 writers on songs were listed as "unknown."
These eleven were not included in the above analysis.
Three additional measures were evaluated for female songwriters. The first was
race/ethnicity
. Each
female songwriter was evaluated for underrepresented status (no, yes). Of the 411 females assessed,
43.3% were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups and 56.7% were white. However, marked
variation was observed over time. As shown in Table 12, 59.4% of female songwriters were
underrepresented in 2018 which was higher than 2017 (53.5%). Only 29.8% of female songwriters were
women of color in 2012, a percentage substantially lower than 2018.
Table 12
Percentage of Underrepresented Female Songwriters
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Total
% UR Females
29.8%
36.2%
32.2%
39.4%
46.1%
53.5%
59.4%
43.3%
Total #
47
47
59
66
65
58
69
411
Note: The percentage of white female songwriters can be obtained by subtracting a particular
cell from 100%.
Besides underrepresented status, we also assessed the
genre
of female songwriters. The majority of
female songwriters were in Pop (58.6%) followed by Hip-Hop/Rap (17.8%) and Dance/Electric (9.5%). Few
were writing lyrics and melodies in the R&B/Soul (5.8%), Alternative (4.4%), and Country (3.9%) space.
Similar to performers, we also scrutinized writing credits by gender (see Table 13). There were no
meaningful differences (±5 percentage points) in the number of credits for males and female songwriters
in the sample evaluated. Thus, female songwriters were punching at the same weight as their male peers
but were afforded fewer opportunities.
Table 13
Number of Songs by Songwriter Gender
#
of Songs
Male Songwriters
Female Songwriters
Total
# of
Writers
%
# of
Writers
%
# of
Writers
%
1
894
68%
131
70.8%
1,025
68.3%
2
190
14.5%
19
10.3%
209
13.9%
3
75
5.7%
7
3.8%
82
5.5%
4
32
2.4%
8
4.3%
40
2.7%
5
32
2.4%
8
4.3%
40
2.7%
≥6
92
7%
12
6.5%
104
6.9%
Total
1,315
100%
185
100%
1,500
100%
Note: Percentages were calculated within gender. The range of 6 or more was collapsed for presentational
purposes.
Where differences emerged by gender was among top performing songwriters (see Table 14). As shown,
the top male songwriter had over two times as many credits (Max Martin) as the top female songwriter
on the year-end charts (Nicki Minaj). The top 10 male songwriters wrote or co-wrote just under a quarter
(23%) of all songs in the sample.
Table 14
Top Individual Songwriters by Gender
Top Male Songwriters
# of
Songs
Top Female Songwriters
# of
Songs
Martin Sandberg (Max Martin)
39
Onika Maraj (Nicki Minaj)
18
Aubrey Graham (Drake)
33
Robyn Fenty (Rihanna)
14
Benjamin Levin (Benny Blanco)
24
Taylor Swift
12
Henry Walter (Cirkut)
22
Katheryn Hudson (Katy Perry)
9
Lukasz Gottwald (Dr. Luke)
21
Adele Adkins
8
Savan Kotecha
19
Sia Furler
8
Johan Schuster (Shellback)
18
Belcalis Almanzar (Cardi B)
8
Dijon McFarlane (DJ Mustard)
15
Brittany Hazzard (Starrah)
8
Michael Williams II (Mike WILL Made-it)
14
Selena Gomez
7
Adam Levine
14
The final question addressed in this section is this: do female artists support and work with women
songwriters? To answer this query, we only looked at non-duplicating songs in the sample to avoid
double counting. Thus, our sample size reduced to 633. Then, we examined each song for the gender of
the artist and the songwriter. 21.3% (n=135) of the songs in the sample were by female singer-
songwriters with no additional non-performing female writers. These women do not provide employment
opportunities for other women and predominantly worked with male writers and other male artists.
Out of 633 songs, 48 songs (7.6%) were written by at least one female songwriter who did not work with
a female artist on the song. A total of 90 songs (14.2%) featured at least one female artist and at least one
female songwriter. This is a 6.6 percentage point gain. Female artists may be the key to increasing
women’s access and opportunity to write in the music industry. This is imperative, as females face an
epidemic of invisibility penning songs. Of the 633 songs, 360 or 57% lacked the presence of a female
writer. In stark contrast, only 3 or <1% lacked any male songwriters.
Producers
. For producers, our investigation only focused on a subset of songs. Here, we examined the top
400 songs of 2012, 2015, 2017, and 2018. Across 400 songs, 871 producers, co producers and vocal
producers were credited.
8
An individual receiving multiple producing credits on a song was only counted
once. A total of 853 or 97.9% of producers were male and only 2.1% were female (n=18). The yearly
breakdown is revealed in Table 15. There has been no change over the four years evaluated, with a
gender ratio of 47.4 males to every one female.
Table 15
Producer Gender by Year
Gender
2012
2015
2017
2018
Total
Males
97.6% (n=200)
98.2% (n=217)
98.2% (n=221)
97.7% (n=215)
97.9% (n=853)
Females
2.4% (n=5)
1.8% (n=4)
1.8% (n=4)
2.3% (n=5)
2.1% (n=18)
Ratio
40 to 1
54.3 to 1
55.3 to 1
43 to 1
47.4 to 1
We removed the 14 songs that repeated across the charts in the time frame examined, bringing the
sample to 386. After this, the total number of female producers reduced to 15 individual women and 17
credits. Eleven of these producers were white and 4 were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups.
Only two women worked twice as producers across the songs evaluated.
The results for songwriters and producers point to the continued exclusion of women from these
positions. The percentages in 2018 reflect that there has been no change in hiring practices related to
women behind the scenes in these roles. As songwriters, women of color were 59.4% of the females
writing popular music in 2018, and 43.3% of female songwriters overall. Female producers of color,
however, do not fare as well. Only 4 women of color have producing credits across the 400 songs
analyzed. In the next section, we move to exploring differences by gender and race/ethnicity in critical
acclaim.
Grammy Awards®: 2013-2019
The goal of this section is to understand how critical and industry honors vary by gender and to update
our previous analysis on the Grammy® nominations. Seven years (2013-2019) of selected categories of
Grammy® nominations were analyzed.
9
These were: Record of the Year, Album of the Year, Song of the
Year, Best New Artist, and Producer of the Year. We identified every individual who received a
nomination in these categories from the 55
th
to the 61
st
Grammy Awards®, including the individual
members of groups. The results below are discussed by year and by category. The final analysis overviews
gender differences in the frequency of nominations.
1,064 individuals received a Grammy Award® nomination in the select categories from 2013 to 2019. A
full 89.6% were male and 10.4% were female, a gender ratio of 8.6 males to every one female. Table 15
reveals that the percentage of female nominees in 2019 was significantly higher than 2018 and 2013.
Despite this, 2018 was not different than 2015 or 2016 in the percentage of women nominated. One
explanation for this increase is the expansion of nominees in several categories, allowing for a numerical
increase in both women and men over prior years.
Table 15
Grammy® Nominations by Gender and Year
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Total
Males
92.1%
(n=105)
91.8%
(n=156)
85.9%
(n=134)
88.5%
(n=138)
93.6%
(n=190)
92%
(n=92)
83.6%
(n=138)
89.6%
(n=953)
Females
7.9%
(n=9)
8.2%
(n=14)
14.1%
(n=22)
11.5%
(n=18)
6.4%
(n=13)
8%
(n=8)
16.4%
(n=27)
10.4%
(n=111)
Note: The gender of one producing group could not be identified and was not included in this analysis.
Gender differences across categories are depicted in Table 16. While males were the majority of
nominees in each category, females were most likely to be nominated for Best New Artist, followed by
Song of the Year. In the Record and Album of the Year categories, fewer than 10% of nominees were
women. For the first time in the seven years analyzed, a woman (Linda Perry) was nominated for
Producer of the Year.
Table 16
Grammy® Nominations by Gender and Category
Record of
the Year
Album of
the Year
Song of
the Year
Best New
Artist
Producer of
the Year
Total
Males
91.8%
(n=259)
93.4%
(n=520)
79.4%
(n=104)
58.9%
(n=33)
97.4%
(n=37)
89.6%
(n=953)
Females
8.2%
(n=23)
6.6%
(n=37)
20.6%
(n=27)
41.1%
(n=23)
2.6%
(n=1)
10.4%
(n=111)
Note: The gender of one producing group could not be identified and was not included in this analysis.
For female nominees, race/ethnicity was analyzed. Overall, 36.9% (n=41) of female nominees were
women of color. Differences in nominations for women of color by category are shown in Table 17. The
largest number of underrepresented females received nominations for Album of the Year, followed by
Record of the Year and Best New Artist—the latter category grew by 16.1 percentage points from last
year’s total.
Table 17
Female Grammy® Nominations by Underrepresented Status and Category
Record of
the Year
Album of
the Year
Song of
the Year
Best New
Artist
Producer of
the Year
Total
UR
34.8%
(n=8)
51.3%
(n=19)
18.5%
(n=5)
34.8%
(n=8)
100%
(n=1)
36.9%
(n=41)
Not UR
65.2%
(n=15)
48.7%
(n=18)
81.5%
(n=22)
65.2%
(n=15)
0
63.1%
(n=70)
The final analysis examines the frequency with which men and women were nominated. The list of overall
nominees was reduced to 608 individuals who were nominated for one or more Grammys in select
categories over the past seven years. Of these, 87.5% were male and 12.5% were female. This translates
to a ratio of 7 males to every 1 female.
For both men and women, the distribution of nominations was similar, save one category. Most
individuals received just one nomination between 2013 and 2019, though men were more likely to
receive five or more nominations than women were. For men, the range of nominations was 1 to 17 (Tom
Coyne) while for females it was 1 to 7 (Taylor Swift).
Table 18
Number of Grammy® Nominations by Gender
No. of Nominations
Males
Females
1
69.2% (n=368) 71.1% (n=54)
2
15.8% (n=84)
18.4% (n=14)
3
5.3% (n=28) 7.9% (n=6)
4
3.2% (n=17)
1.3% (n=1)
≥5
6.6% (n=35) 1.3% (n=1)
Total
532
76
Note: Columns total to 100%.
For women, we also examined nomination frequency by race/ethnicity. Of the 76 individual women,
61.8% (n=47) were white and 38.2% (n=29) were women of color. Again, there were no differences in the
frequency of nominations for white women and women of color. Most (72.4%=white vs. 70.2%=UR)
received only one nomination. Only two women over the last seven years have received more than three
nominations: Taylor Swift (7) and Beyoncé (4).
This section reveals that there is more progress to be made at the Grammys for women. Overall, 10% of
nominees in major categories over the last few years were female, with a slight improvement from 2018
to 2019. Notably, for the first time in the seven years we evaluated, a woman was nominated for
Producer of the Year. These promising changes reveal that the industry can take steps toward change, but
that progress must be accelerated.
Barriers Facing Female Songwriters & Producers in Music
Across seven years and 700 popular songs, 12.3% of songwriters and 2% of producers were female. These
figures beg the question: why? The purpose of this investigation was to understand the reasons for the
low numbers of women participating behind the scenes in the music industry. To that end, we conducted
a series of qualitative interviews to learn the impediments facing women in two positions: songwriting
and producing.
In the summer and fall of 2018, 75 interviews were conducted with female songwriters and producers.
10
Interviewees spanned genres and experience levels in music; 47% indicated they were songwriters, 9%
were producers, and 44% held both roles. The average age of participants was 33 (range=21-59). In terms
of racial/ethnic identification, 71% were white and 29% from an underrepresented racial/ethnic group.
Finally, 16% of participants worked outside the U.S.
Each participant was asked what barriers have you faced as a songwriter or producer in music? Responses
were spontaneous, with some receiving additional prompts. Answers were analyzed for similar themes
which pointed to the existence of a career impediment.
11
In their answer, individuals could indicate that
they had personally faced the barrier in question, could state that other women they knew faced the
barrier, or describe general situations they had heard about in the music industry. Each barrier is
described in this section alongside research that explains how it relates to career paths.
Figure 2
Barriers Facing Female Songwriters and Producers in Music
General Career Barriers
The first two spontaneous barriers indicated by participants were not gender-specific. More than one-
third (40%, n=30) of interviewees stated that they face difficulty navigating the industry, including
breaking into the business, making connections, and getting into different rooms. Given the complexities
of launching a creative career in a decentralized industry like the music business, this barrier is not
surprising.
A second impediment women stated was the financial instability associated with a music career.
Nineteen percent (n=14) of women described the lack of royalties available to songwriters and producers,
the changing nature of the industry due to streaming services, and the difficulties associated with
supporting oneself on the income generated from songwriting or producing. While financial uncertainties
associated with artistic careers are certainly difficult and noteworthy, they do not provide a full
explanation of why women work less than men. The problems associated with financial instability in
music can face both males and females, particularly as revenue models change.
43.0%
39.0%
36.0%
4.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Skills Discounted Stereotyped & Sexualized Male-Dominated Industry Work/Life Balance
Apart from these two categories, 11% (n=8) of interviewees stated that their age created a barrier. An
additional 11% (n=8) provided a series of other reasons why they faced impediments in music, which
were not related to their gender.
Women’s Skills and Abilities are Discounted
The first major barrier that faced female songwriters and producers was the consistent and persistent
dismissal of their work and contributions. A full 43% (n=32) of interviewees stated spontaneously that
two main issues confronted them as songwriters and producers. First, they were dismissed or not taken
seriously—their abilities, competence, and knowledge in the role of songwriter or producer were
doubted or were undercut by their colleagues. A second and related issue was that they had to prove
their competence to individuals who might work with them.
These two barriers—that women’s contributions are dismissed and that they must repeatedly prove
themselves to their male colleagues—create challenges in two ways. If women’s creative input is not
valued or doubted this could have an economic impact on the revenue they derive from their profession.
It also affects the experiences women have of bringing a creative product to fruition. When women must
prove their abilities to others before they are considered for employment or to ensure their contributions
are recognized, this might also impact their professional trajectory.
The dismissal of women’s contributions fits into a larger pattern of research on the perception of
women’s knowledge or ability by others. For example, evidence suggests that men and women use
gender as a reference when determining expertise.
12
Women may be perceived to hold less expertise or
competence than men, particularly in a stereotypically masculine domain.
13
The results of challenging
others in the workplace might also influence perceptions of women, who may even be punished for
violating gender norms.
14
When it comes to proving themselves, women may face a more difficult road than males, as they could
be subject to differing standards of competence or excellence.
15
In one study, researchers found that the
minimal competence standard for a female job applicant was lower than for a male.
16
However, the
female applicants faced higher standards than male applicants when the level of their ability was
considered. While women may be able to get their foot in the door, they may be plagued by the idea that
they are “good for a girl” rather than being seen as equally proficient at a task as their male colleagues.
At the crux of this barrier is the idea that men may resist women’s influence more than women resist
men’s influence. To more deeply probe this idea, we asked women a follow-up question about whether
their leadership or vision had been resisted by a colleague. 92% of women answered yes.
Women once again reported that they were ignored or discounted (43%, n=32) such that their
contributions were either not recognized or not taken seriously. Nearly one-third (29%, n=22) stated that
they were demeaned, or that others argued, embarrassed them or undermined their input. A further 19%
(n=14) said that women taking on leadership threatened men, while 16% (n=12) stated that stereotyping
about their gender was used to dismiss their work or their abilities. This could include individuals making
assumptions about women’s ability to lead or their technical proficiency.
While creative work may be shaped through the exchange of ideas and compromise between
collaborators, women’s experiences in music suggest this is not always the case. Instead, women
songwriters and producers work in environments and with individuals who dismiss their ideas, do not
acknowledge their abilities, and ignore their contributions. This sets up a system in which women must
continually prove their competence, talent, and skills to be considered and hired for work—particularly
when they are the only person of their gender in the room.
Sexualized & Stereotyped
The second impediment, reported by 39% (n=29) of participants in unprompted responses, was that
women’s careers are inextricably tied to expectations about their gender and sexual availability. Women
reported being sexualized (21% n=16), which included being the subject of innuendo, undesired
attention, propositioned, valued for their appearance, and even an awareness or fear of being personally
unsafe in work situations. One-quarter (25%) of interviewees (n=19) stated that gender stereotypes
guided others’ expectations about their behavior, treatment, or opportunities they were given. The
responses in this category illuminate that simply being a woman in music can serve as a barrier to career
success.
How do gender stereotypes influence career outcomes? According to one theorist, the stereotypes we
hold about gender can overlap or diverge from qualities associated with leadership.
17
In particular,
qualities associated with being female, such as being warm, supportive, or kind, are often not the traits
that describe successful leaders. In contrast, attributes that are typically viewed as masculine (e.g.,
ambitious, dominant, assertive) tend to align well with perceptions of leadership. There are at least two
potential consequences that emerge. One is that women may not be projected into leadership roles
because they are perceived to lack leadership qualities. The second is that women who hold leadership
positions may be punished if they behave in ways that are in line with more masculine leadership traits
and violate female gender roles. Women must walk a very fine line in order to both make career gains
and escape backlash.
In the music industry, this leadership paradox for women may be particularly difficult to negotiate when
the role of producer is considered. Across spontaneous interview responses, 12% (n=9) of participants
stated that the qualities associated with producing were associated with males—and that the job itself
was not viewed as something women could do. In other words, when individuals think producer, they
think male. This bias about who has the skills, background, or fits the cognitive profile of a producer
excludes women and may limit their career prospects. This finding aligns with a large body of global
research that suggests that when people “think manager, they think male.”
18
Stereotyping is not the only gender-based hurdle women face. The responses in this category also
indicated that women experience objectification by their colleagues and the wider industry.
19
According
to theorists, objectification occurs when an individual is viewed not as a whole person but instead as a
body and valued on the basis of how the body can be used or consumed. There are several consequences
of diminishing women to mere objects—both to the work context and to women themselves.
Research demonstrates that when women are objectified, they contribute less to groups and perform
less well on tasks, and that harassment can effect speech fluency.
20
Additionally, at least one study has
shown that focusing on a woman’s appearance (but not a man’s) can reduce perceptions of her warmth
and competence.
21
As noted earlier, perceptions related to both women’s fulfillment of gender roles
(e.g., warmth) or competence could lead to backlash or dismissal of her contributions.
When objectified (either by self or others), women’s state of “flow,” a focused state of working, can be
interrupted.
22
One example of this occurs when women must negotiate the objectifying gaze or potential
advances of a male colleague while simultaneously trying to accomplish creative work. Objectification
also has potential consequences for women’s psychological health. The internalization of objectification,
a process called self-objectification, affects some women situationally and others habitually. Self-
objectification can lead to other adverse mental health outcomes, such as body shame.
23
Apart from spontaneous answers that pointed to sexualization and stereotyping, interviewees also
answered a question that specifically asked whether any aspect of the environment of the recording
studio had ever made them feel uncomfortable or uneasy. More than three-quarters (83%) of
participants said that they or other women experienced discomfort in the studio, with 68% specifying that
they themselves had felt this way. Further comments on the question were coded into categories that
represent the reasons participants felt uneasy in the studio.
More than one-third of interviewees (39%, n=24) stated that they had been objectified, hit on, or
experienced sexual innuendo while working. Women recounted experiences in which their safety was a
concern, from attending sessions in remote studios or someone’s home, late at night or with strangers. A
second category of responses (25%, n=19) pointed to being the lone female or one of few women in
environments populated by males. The third source of discomfort (28%, n=21) was having their
contributions, knowledge, or expertise dismissed or even facing hostile language from others. Fourth,
20% (n=15) of interviewees noted that drugs, alcohol, and sexualized women were part of studio culture,
and that being surrounded by intoxication fostered nervousness. Finally, 11% (n=8) of respondents
provided other reasons for their uneasiness, such has feeling under pressure to create a good song,
particularly while others were watching.
The recording studio and the music industry more broadly are sites where women feel that their
appearance and gender mark them for unwanted attention. Additionally, gender stereotypes thwart
women’s ability to participate across the music business in all roles. It is clear that women in music face a
work environment in which their gender makes them primarily valuable for one thing—and it is not their
talent.
Male-Dominated Industry
The third major barrier stated in their initial response by 36% of participants (n=27) occurred as the result
of being a statistical minority in the music business. A full 29.3% (n=22) of interviewees in this category
stated that the music industry was male-dominated or functioned as the proverbial ‘boy’s club.’ This
category also included responses (12%, n=9) who stated that there were few females in songwriting and
production, including few female role models, and the handful of responses (4%, n=3) indicating that
women were competitive with each other.
That music is predominantly created by males—particularly popular music—can be objectively verified,
and has been by reports such as this one. Yet, it is more than the numerical disparity between men and
women that creates a barrier for female songwriters and producers. Being outnumbered by men can
affect women in multiple ways.
The experience of being alone in a group is what researchers have termed solo status.
24
The negative
effects of solo status for women may include decreased task performance and among some, changing
response style to less detailed language.
25
If women are, as we note above, already at risk for being
dismissed or discounted then this may be amplified when they are the only woman in the workgroup.
A second risk to women which is borne out by the spontaneous and prompted answers above, is either
real or threatened forms of gender-based or sexual harassment. Research has shown that these
behaviors are more likely to occur when women have greater contact with males in the workplace.
26
Additionally, sexual or gender-based harassment may be more likely to occur to women who embody
more masculine traits—or who work in more male-dominated environments.
27
To further understand women’s solo status or isolation, we explored quantitative data. After removing
duplicate songs from the sample outlined earlier, we examined 633 popular songs from 2012 to 2018.
Across these songs, 56.9% did not feature even one female writer. When women are present, they are
often alone—31.6% of songs had just one female writer involved. A mere 11.5% of songs had 2 or more
female writers credited. At most, a song had 6 female writers involved. In contrast, up to 16 men were
involved with a song. Only 3 songs in the sample, or less than 1% of 633 songs, did not feature a male
songwriter. Males are also solo contributors to just 9.6% of songs. Thus while women are excluded or
alone on 88.5% of the most popular songs over the last 7 years, men face solo status or erasure on only
10% of these tracks.
Beyond often working alone, a secondary barrier related to working in a male-dominated industry cited
by participants was the lack of role models in songwriting and producing. Women stated that there were
not robust examples of women doing these jobs or shown in other aspects of the music industry such as
playing instruments or working as engineers. However, not all role models are created equal. Research in
computer science reveals that for young women, stereotypical role models of either gender are likely to
repel interest and perceived success in the field. The same is true of environments; when young women
encounter environmental cues that are evocative of computer stereotypes, they are less likely to pursue
the major.
This evidence suggests that expanding women’s interest in music production and songwriting entails
more than ensuing that role models exist. It is imperative that role models do not evoke negative
stereotypes that may decrease interest.
28
At least one other investigation examined how women’s career
aspirations can be influenced by experiencing stereotype threat, or the fear of confirming a negative
stereotype about their gender.
29
In this context, women who were skilled mathematically opted for fields
that were more in line with stereotypically feminine occupations, such as journalism, communication, or
writing instead of technical fields such as engineering or accounting.
One way stereotyping may be communicated is through the pervasive sexualization of women in music.
As noted earlier, women face a climate of objectification in the recording studio. Song lyrics themselves—
especially those with male artists—include references to women’ bodies or sexual activities,
30
making not
only the workplace but the work product a source of objectification. An awareness of these stereotypes
may decrease the likelihood that women will want to pursue a career in the field.
Work and Life Balance
The difficulty of balancing both professional and personal demands was also explored. Few participants
overall (4%, n=3) spontaneously mentioned that work and life balance created a career impediment. We
further probed this topic with a focused question: “To what extent is balancing work and family life an
issue in your career?” This revealed that 70.7% (n=53) of participants personally find this challenging and
an additional 13.3% (n=10) indicated while it might not be a problem for them, other women across the
business might see this as a barrier.
Over half (54.7%, n=41) of participants indicated that their relationships suffered as a result of the
demands of work. These relationships included ties to romantic partners, family members, or friendships.
Interviewees stated that they did not have the time to invest or nurture these bonds, that working in
music put pressure on relationships, or that they chose not to foster these connections. In line with this
category, 25.3% (n=19) of participants indicated that they prioritized their career over relationships or
other aspects of their lives.
A few other issues emerged that created challenges or illuminated how participants strive to create
balance. Roughly ten percent (10.7%, n=8) of participants said that they faced mental or physical health
issues due to the demands of the field. Gender roles and industry biases that make balancing professional
and personal demands a greater burden for women to bear were commented on by 20% (n=15) of
participants. Eight percent said that their family life impacted their career and/or they felt guilt about
their choices. Seven respondents (9.3%) indicated that they put off having children in order to focus on
their careers. Finally, 25.3% (n=19) of those interviewed indicated they did not have children at present.
The challenge of balancing demanding careers with personal relationships and family life is not unique to
music. It has emerged in studies related to females behind the camera in film,
31
and having children or
caring for older relatives affects women to a larger extent than men, even interfering with work
responsibilities.
32
Despite this reality, the need to balance personal and professional concerns may
restrict the opportunities women are able to take, but is not sufficient to explain the low percentages of
women in the field overall.
Women of Color Face Unique Impediments
While few of the individuals (3%, n=2) interviewed stated that being from an underrepresented
racial/ethnic group created an impediment to their careers, a follow up question yielded more
information. More than 80% (82.3%, n=14) of the women from underrepresented racial/ethnic
backgrounds prompted on the topic (n=17 of 21) indicated either directly or indirectly that their
race/ethnicity created a barrier to their work in music.
These women reported that they were not considered (58.8%, n=10) for certain projects when their
identity was clear before they met someone, that they were rejected for certain opportunities, or not
taken seriously, and that they were not seen as marketable. Additionally, 29.4% (n=5) said they were
stereotyped in terms of the genre in which they could work. Similarly, 29.4% (n=5) said they did not
receive support in the form of acceptance, praise, or that they were only respected within their in-group.
Finally 29.4% (n=5) stated that they were hired based on their token status or that they were the only
person of color in the room.
Research supports the idea that women of color face greater hurdles than their white female
counterparts across industries. Studies show that women from underrepresented racial/ethnic
backgrounds are disadvantaged for promotions, may experience a larger wage gap, and feel that they lack
access to mentorship, informal relationships with co-workers, role models, and assignments that bring
visibility.
33
In other facets of entertainment, women of color are far less likely that their white female
colleagues to work as film or TV directors, film producers, executives, in notable below-the-line positions,
and as film critics.
34
In a previous study on barriers facing underrepresented film directors, women of
color indicated that the influence of both their gender and race limited their career opportunities.
35
As
noted above, only 4 women of color worked as producers across 400 songs from 2012 to 2018—
providing further evidence that in music women of color confront obstacles that their white female peers
do not.
Additional Barriers
In addition to what is described above, a small percentage of women described additional barriers that
they faced. Each will be described briefly.
Nine percent (n=7) of women stated that there were internal barriers that created difficulties for them in
their work in the music industry. This included lacking confidence, knowledge, or perceiving that their
own abilities were limited. While women may legitimately feel that they need to enhance their skills,
knowledge or abilities in their chosen field, other factors may be at work. Research suggests that
individuals may self-stereotype, particularly if their gender identity is more salient.
36
After working in a
business rife with gender stereotypes, women may be more likely to view themselves as their industry
sees them.
Eleven percent (n=8) of participants indicated that the music industry was more difficult for women
generally, without offering additional information on how or why that might be the case. Finally, 4% (n=3)
of participants stated that to find success they pursued work on their own terms. By choosing to operate
outside of closed networks, they were able to create opportunities.
The results of the qualitative analysis provide an explanation for the lack of women in music. Through
women’s own words and experiences, it is clear that the way they are viewed and treated in the industry
prevents more women from exploring careers in music. What follows are closing thoughts on the data
presented here and solutions to remedy the ongoing exclusion of women in songwriting and producing.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was twofold. First, we updated our initial study on the prevalence of women
and people of color working as artists, songwriters and producers in popular music. The results revealed
that little has changed in the last year. Second, we explored the reasons why so few women work as
songwriters and producers in the industry. Through interviews with 75 individuals employed in this
capacity, the experiences of women in music illuminated the impediments women face.
In 2018, issues of inclusion in music took center stage, but the percentage of female participants still lags.
Only 17.1% of Billboard Hot 100 artists in 2018, and 21.7% of artists overall across the past seven years
were female. Women were primarily individual performers, and most likely to be found in pop music.
Behind the music, however, females were still just 12.3% of songwriters overall and a mere 2% of
producers. These latter two percentage points have not changed in the seven year time period studied.
The inescapable conclusion from this report is that the major impediment confronting women is the very
way the industry views their gender. Women described being isolated, objectified, and dismissed. These
issues individually create barriers but collectively impose a matrix of issues that women must navigate. As
described above, when women are the sole female in a workgroup, their ideas may be less persuasive
and their leadership resisted. They may be objectified by group members, creating the potential for a
hostile work environment and gender-based harassment. Finally, pervasive gender stereotypes about
women’s interests and abilities may mean that women are not considered to possess the skills and
abilities needed to take on certain roles. The low percentage of women participating as songwriters and
producers is the inevitable result of an industry that does not seem to believe that women are valuable
assets in these roles.
In addition to the impediments facing women, it is also clear that women of color face unique challenges
as songwriters and producers. As noted earlier, women of color make up a very small percentage of
producers. Perceptions and stereotypes related to an individuals’ racial/ethnic background, and the
feeling of working as a token, seem to create additional impediments to success.
Turning to artists, however, in 2018 over half of the performers on a Billboard Hot 100 song were from
underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. In fact, of female artists, 73% were women of color. These figures
offer a sharp contrast to other forms of entertainment, particularly film, where people from
underrepresented racial/ethnic groups are often marginalized on screen.
What can be done to combat the impediments facing women and ensure greater access and
opportunity? We propose several solutions to improve the participation of women and counter the biases
described above.
Create Environments Where Women are Welcome
As women described, the recording studio and other workspaces in music are sites for objectification and
dismissal of their opinions and ideas. Additionally, these predominantly male environments isolate
women, at times creating fears for personal safety. One way to change the dynamics in these spaces is to
ensure that women are welcome and present.
Adding more women not only changes the ratio, it eliminates their solo status and may clear social
identity threats that can undermine their performance. Increasing the percentage of females in the
recording studio may not only lead to better individual performance, but to better work product overall.
In a question that specifically asked about whether the presence of more women altered the studio
environment, 80% (n=60) of participants answered yes, 10.7% (n=8) said they were unsure, and 8% (n=6)
said no. One individual did not respond.
What changes when more women are in the studio? Over half of the women (52%, n=39) interviewed
said that adding more women to this context creates a culture of collaboration. This includes better
communication, an emotional connection with others, feeling their skills and abilities would not be
dismissed, and that the resulting music would be a product of positive collaboration. Nearly one-third
(45.3%, n=34) said that they felt or would feel more at ease in the studio with more women present. This
translated to feeling less alone, a sense of comfort, and that someone “had their back.” More than one-
third (30.7%, n=23) stated that it was important to change the ratio and have more women present.
Some individuals (6.7%, n=5) mentioned that having more women present could neutralize bad behavior
in the studio, and 8% (n=6) said that they were unsure whether the presence of more women would
create change as they had always worked alone. A few responses (14.7%, n=11) said that having more
women in the studio has made things more difficult in the past.
There are current industry programs that are working to create spaces that are friendlier to women. One
example is She Is The Music. A non-profit whose goal is to increase the number of women working in
music, She Is The Music conducts songwriting camps where women work collectively to create new
music. These all-women rooms are designed to create environments where women feel supported, safe,
and are able to let their creativity flourish. By bringing women together, She Is The Music is disrupting the
ways that the recording industry treats women to create new models for success.
Create Opportunities for Women to Use their Skills and Talents
Improving the number of women working in popular music is essential, and it begins with creating ways
that women’s skills and talents can be recognized and used. Women reported being dismissed or not
taken seriously in the recording studio, a barrier that can reduce their effectiveness and long-term career
sustainability. At least one study suggests that credibility and legitimacy conveyed by others strengthens
women’s influence in groups.
37
Beyond simply hiring more women, one strategy to improve women’s
experience in the studio is for others to ensure that their expertise and talents are noted.
Spotify has taken steps to ensure that women’s skills are nurtured and recognized. Through the EQL
Studio Residency Program, Spotify supports three female producers and engineers in studios located in
New York, Nashville, and London. The residency program offers women the opportunity to use their skills,
be mentored by other industry practitioners and gives them the recognition and support they need to
move forward in their careers. By putting women in the studio, Spotify is setting the stage for these
individual’s careers and expanding the purview of what women can do.
Role Models and Mentorships
Beliefs about what women can and should do are rooted in gender role stereotypes. As noted earlier,
these stereotypes can influence perceptions and shape aspirations of young people for careers and
activities. Participants in this study reported that the lack of females in songwriting and producing
positions means that there are few role models for young women. They also told us that producing, in
particular, was viewed as a job for men.
It is imperative that outdated stereotypes about women’s capabilities be traded for a new vision of what
women can do. One tool that can expand our view of women is the media. Portraying women and
showcasing their work as songwriters, producers, and engineers is one way to demonstrate that women
can thrive in these roles. By witnessing women succeeding in those positions, the ambitions of young
women and the beliefs that men hold can be transformed. One strategy developed to address this
pipeline is the For The Record Collective. The For The Record Collective is a call to action for inclusion that
will feature a first-of-its-kind collection of EPs, docuseries, and live events with music produced, written,
and engineered by women.
Another avenue to support young women as they seek to move into songwriting and producing positions
is mentorships and sponsorships. Mentorship plays a large role in She Is The Music’s plan to increase the
number of women working in music. It is also a key aspect of Spotify’s EQL residency in partnership with
Berklee College of Music. Moreover, training, mentorship, and support for women are the basis for
groups such as Women’s Audio Mission, SoundGirls, Gender Amplified, Girls Make Beats, and SheWrites.
These organizations have been working to ensure that women’s talents are nurtured and that the
pipeline for employment in the music industry is robust.
Commit to Considering & Hiring More Females
A final way to include more women in the recording studio is to hire them. Women in this study stated
that they routinely felt the need to prove themselves to those they worked alongside or who could hire
them. In an environment where women feel their skills are doubted, companies, labels, managers, and
artists can commit to considering and hiring more women to write, produce, and engineer their music.
One option for ensuring that more women are part of production is for groups to set target inclusion
goals. These would specify the number of women to be considered in specific producing or engineering
roles.
38
Goals could also be set for songwriting camps to include a certain number of female writers.
Inclusion goals are a legal way for companies to remedy historical imbalances in the number of individuals
from a protected group working in industries or organizations. By making the process of hiring producers
and engineers more thoughtful and focused, target inclusion goals can ensure that progress is made
toward a more balanced pool of songwriters, producers, and engineers. Target inclusion goals will not
only get more women onto consideration lists, but should result in more women in the studio who are
utilizing their talents and abilities to create new music.
Limitations and Future Directions
A few limitations of the study are worth noting. In terms of the quantitative study, the sample was
constructed from the Billboard Hot 100. This is one measure of popularity, but may not reflect the full
spectrum of the music business. Examining different genres or using another indicator of popularity or
sales could change the resulting picture of the industry. Secondly, while race/ethnicity was measured
across artists, we only examined the underrepresented status of female songwriters and producers. It is
important for future research to expand this analysis to understand how men of color fare as songwriters
and producers. It is also necessary to expand access to information on the topic in order to allow
researchers to disaggregate the data to understand how different groups are represented in music. Third,
we restricted our analysis to only artists, songwriters, and producers, but other positions must be
explored. In a follow up analysis in 2018, we found that only 3% of mixing and mastering engineers were
women. Examining other positions, such as session singers, instrumentalists, and executives across the
industry is important for developing a wider understanding of inclusion throughout the business.
The qualitative analysis is limited by a few factors as well. The analysis on barriers facing females is based
on interviews with volunteer participants. Individuals who were willing to participate might differ in
important ways from those who did not volunteer. Including the perspectives of others could alter the
nature or consistency of the responses. There may also be additional barriers that face female
songwriters and producers that are not included here. In particular, it is important to further understand
how interactions with labels might create career impediments. Several aspects of this, from interacting
with A&R professionals to dealing with publishers, were explored in interviews but are not analyzed here.
Lastly, exploring the process of crediting and “splits” will be important for future research, as this may be
one way that females’ participation is restricted in music. Despite these limitations, this study reveals the
notable ways that women, their voices, and their talents have been curbed in the creation of music.
In conclusion, when we consider the barriers facing women it is no surprise that the percentage of
women working in popular music has changed little over time. Until woman are valued for their
contributions more than for their bodies, the music business will continue to be a place where women
feel at best disrespected and at worst unsafe. In order to see true and long-term change, the industry
must feed the pipeline of women who are coming up through the various organizations working to
support the next generation of female songwriters and producers. It must also work to address the ways
in which women currently experience isolation, objectification, and dismissal throughout its ranks. By
embracing collective action and new solutions, music can be an industry that celebrates all people and all
voices.
Acknowledgements
We are indebted to many individuals who support our research and advocacy. A very special thanks to
Wallis Annenberg and Cinny Kennard of the Annenberg Foundation, Ruth Ann Harnisch and Jenny
Raymond of the Harnisch Foundation, and Thao Pham of the Clif Bar Family Foundation. These individuals
have supported our vision and championed our efforts.
We are also grateful to Advisory Board members Jody Gerson, Samantha Kirby Yoh, Jennifer Justice, Carla
Sacks, Tena Clark, and Brenda Robinson for not only their contributions to our Initiative, but for their
efforts in promoting equality and inclusion in the music industry. Numerous individuals also assisted us in
completing the qualitative portion of the report. We are grateful for the ways in which they connected us
to women working as songwriters and producers throughout the industry.
Special thanks to the individuals and groups who perennially support our efforts, including Jacquelyn and
Gregory Zehner Foundation, Barbara Bridges, Bonnie Arnold, Suzanne Lerner, Julie Parker Benello, Ann
Lovell, Mari and Manuel Alba, Beth Friedman, Ann Erickson and The Pritzker Pucker Family Foundation.
Additionally, heartfelt thanks to our USC Annenberg Communication and Marketing team: Emily
Cavalcanti, Mira Zimet, Mike Mauro, Rachelle Martin, and Ted Kissell, as well as every student that helped
with this research in our lab. A special thanks to Morgan Grimm for her assistance on the qualitative
research for this investigation.
Colleen Abello
Francis Agustin
Kian Broder Wang
Sanil Chawla
Dana Le Dinh
Karla Hernandez
Katherine Kelly
Ruixue Luo
Zoe Moore
Chadam Ferrari Pires
Julissa Romero
Carolin Trocme
Eleonora Viotto
Emma Vranich
28
Footnotes
1. The year-end Hot 100 chart on Billboard can be retrieved here: https://www.billboard.com/charts/ year-
end/2018/hot-100-songs. As noted in our seminal report, some songs repeat across year-end charts. This happened
with 67 songs across the seven years evaluated. These overlapping songs were included in analyses within each
year-end chart they appeared. However, the 67 repeating songs were excluded when analyzing individuals credited
multiple times across the sample.
All unitizing and variable coding decisions can be found in the S. Smith, M. Choueiti, and K. Pieper (2018) Inclusion in
the Recording Studio report. Artists were included as they appeared on the Billboard chart. Photos, online
information, industry databases, pronoun usage, biographies, and other referents were used to determine the
gender of all individuals credited across the sample. Information to determine gender was found for all artists.
2. Retrieved from Music Watch: https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/MusicWatch-Consumer-
Profile-2017.pdf
3. Similar to the previous report, songs appearing on soundtracks or compilation albums were categorized into one
of the designations reported. This was done using artist genre and information. The 700 songs across the entire
sample without removing repeats were categorized into the following genres: 300 (42.9%) Pop, 181 (25.9%) Hip-
Hop/Rap, 63 (9%) Alternative, 63 (9%) Country, 47 (6.7%) R&B/Soul, and 46 (6.6%) Dance/Electronic.
4. Excluding featuring artists from Table 3 does not meaningfully (±5 percentage points) affect any of the female cell
findings for any of the years studied. As such, these credits remained in the analyses and are reported in the results.
5. Adding upon the data collected from the inaugural study, our research team looked up each new individual Artist
for information pertaining to their race/ethnicity across online databases (i.e., StudioSystem, Variety Insight) and/or
other internet based sources. In this report, race/ethnicity for individuals is categorized as either white/caucasian or
person of color (Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, Asian/South Asian, Native American/Alaskan Native,
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern, or Other/Mixed Race), noted as ‘underrepresented’ in this report.
For 29.3% of individual artists in this sample (n=155), racial/ethnic grouping (White vs. Underrepresented) was
inferred by the senior research team members using images and/or biographical information. In a prior study, we
calculated a 0.90 correlation between our categorization of individuals on this binary measure and their confirmed
status. Thus, we are quite confident in the validity of our race/ethnicity judgments. Occasionally, new information
that alters the judgments made in this report may be uncovered. Subsequent investigations will reflect any potential
changes.
6. U.S. Census (2019). Quick facts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045218
7. Songwriting credits were retrieved from a combination of three online databases: ASCAP
(https://www.ascap.com/repertory), BMI (http://repertoire.bmi.com), and SESAC
(https://www.sesac.com/Repertory/RepertorySearch.aspx).
We were unable to confirm the gender identify of 33 individuals credited as songwriters across the 700 songs using
databases or online information. For gender, we classified 23 of these writers based upon their first name (e.g.,
Peter) – all were categorized as Male. Seven individuals were credited as “Unknown Writer” instead of being named.
We excluded these seven unknowns and the remaining three songwriters from all analyses.
All female writers as well as the top 10 male writers were researched and categorized for race/ethnicity in the same
manner as artists. The senior team members inferred 71 (38.4%) of the 185 individual female songwriters in the
sample as white or underrepresented using the same method applied for artists.
29
8. Across the 386 songs from 2012, 2015, 2017, and 2018, album liner notes were used to retrieve producing credits
for 288 songs. The website Genius.com and one news article were used to determine the producers, co-producers,
and vocal producers on the remaining 98 songs (25.4%). We used the Recording Academy’s producer definitions to
determine eligibility for this analysis:
https://www.grammy.com/sites/com/files/pages/producer_definitions_for_awards.pdf
. Obtaining gender and
race/ethnicity for producers followed the same approach used for artists and songwriters.
Four credits were excluded from Producer analyses. We could not confirm the exhaustive membership of the
individuals in the group, Shampoo Press & Curl. This group appeared three times across the sample (credited as
Producer) and was excluded from analyses. Additionally, we excluded one producer credited by their stage name as
we could not confirm their identity or gender. We inferred the racial/ethnic grouping for eight (53.3%) of the 15
female producers.
9. Grammy® Award nominees were gleaned from https://www.grammy.com
and other websites. Each individual
attached to a nomination (by mention of name or group, band, or duo affiliation) was included in the analyses.
However, we did not include the performing artists associated with Song of the Year nominations – only the
nominated songwriters were included. Of the 76 individual females, senior research team members inferred the
underrepresented status (white vs. woman of color) for 22 nominees (28.9%).
10. Only individuals who could be perceived as female-presenting were invited to participate in the study. Put
differently, no male-identifying individuals were interviewed for this investigation. Each interview was conducted
over the phone by one of three of the study authors. Participants were asked a series of twelve questions, some of
which included follow up prompts when necessary. The interviews focused on the career path and experiences of
female songwriters and producers. All responses were transcribed from audio recordings, checked for accuracy,
aggregated by members of the research team, and analyzed by the study authors.
11. Coding of qualitative interviews focused on frequently occurring themes and theoretically relevant information
from five of the interview questions, including all relevant follow ups. While major barriers emerged from
spontaneous mentions, two individuals were prompted to specifically discuss their gender in relation to the barriers.
Those responses are counted as spontaneous. In this section, the unit of analysis is an individual’s response to a
single question. Thus, answers range in length by question and by respondent, and may fit into multiple categories.
Responses to additional interview questions are included in discussions of each career impediment when relevant.
Questions provided in text are provided as they were posed to interviewees.
12. Hollingshead, A., & Fraidin, S.N. (2003). Gender stereotypes and assumptions about expertise in transactive
memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 355-363. Thomas-Hunt, M.C. & Phillips, K.W. (2004). When
what you know is not enough: Expertise and gender dynamics in task groups. Personality Social Psychology Bulletin,
30(12), 1585-1598.
13. Hollingshead & Fraidin (2003). Thomas-Hunt & Phillips (2004).
14. Eagly, A.H., & Karau, S.J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review,
109(3), 573–598.
15. Foschi, M., Lai, L., & Sigerson, K., (1994). Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(4), 326-339. Brescoll, V.L., Dawson, E., & Uhlmann, E.L. (2010). Hard won and easily
lost: the fragile status of leaders in gender-stereotype-incongruent occupations. Pyschological Science, 21(11), 1640-
1642.
30
16. Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender- and race-based standards of competence: lower minimum
standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 72(3), 544-
557.
17. Eagly & Karau. (2002).
18. Schein, V.E. (1975). Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics
among female managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3), 340–344. Schein, V.E. (2001). A global look at
psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 675-688.
19. Fredrickson, B.L., & Roberts, T.A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived
experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206.
20. Saguy, T., Quinn, D.M., Dovidio, J.F., & Pratto, F. (2010). Interacting like a body: Objectification can lead women
to narrow their presence in social interactions. Psychological Science, 21(2), 178-182. Gervais, S.J., Vescio, T.K., &
Allen, J. (2011). When what you see is what you get: The consequences of the objectifying gaze for women and men.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(1), 5-17. Woodzicka, J.A., & LaFrance, M. (2005). The effects of subtle sexual
harassment on women’s performance in a job interview. Sex Roles, 53(1/2), 67-77.
21. Heflick, N., Goldenberg, J.L, Cooper, D.P., & Puvia, E. (2011). From women to objects: Appearance focus, target
gender, and perceptions of warmth, morality and competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 572-
581.
22. Guizzo, F., & Cadinu, M. (2017). Effects of objectifying gaze on female cognitive performance: The role of flow
experience and internalization of beauty ideals. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(2), 281-292.
23. Frederickson & Roberts (1997). Quinn, D.M., Kallen, R.W., Twenge, J.M., & Fredrickson, B.L. (2006). The
disruptive effect of self-objectification on performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), 59-64.
24. For definition and review of research related to this term, see Thompson, M., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2002). When
being different is detrimental: Solo status and the performance of women and racial minorities. Analyses of Social
Issues and Public Policy, 2(1), 183-203.
25. Beaton, A., Tougas, F., Rinfret, N., Huard, N., & Delisle, M-N. (2007). Strength in numbers? Women and
mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22(3), 291-306. Seaquaptewa, D. & Thompson, M.
(2002). The differential effects of solo status on members of high- and low-status groups. Psychology and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 694-707.
26. Gruber, J.E. (1998). The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women’s experience
of sexual harassment. Gender & Society, 12(3), 301-320. See also Berdahl (2007) for other studies supporting this
result.
27. Berdahl, J.L. (2007). The sexual harassment of uppity women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 425-437.
Willness, C.R., Steel, P., & Lee, K. (2007). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual
harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 127-162. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C.L., Gelfand, M.J., Magley, V.J.
(1997). Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 82(4), 578-589.
28. Cheryan, S., Drury, B.J., & Vichayapai, M. (2012). Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role
models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37 (1), 72-79.
31
29. Davies, P.G., Spencer, S.J., Quinn, D.M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television
commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 28(12), 1615-–1628.
30. Cougar Hall, P., West, J.H, & Hill, S. (2012). Sexualization in lyrics of popular music from 1959 to 2009:
Implications for sexuality educators. Sexuality & Culture, 16, 103-117. Glynn, M.A., Craig, C.M., Anderson, C.N., &
Holody, K.J. (2016). Objectification in popular music lyrics: An examination of gender and genre differences. Sex
Roles, 75, 164-176.
31. Smith, S. L., Pieper, K., & Choueiti, M. (2014). Exploring the Barriers and Opportunities for
Independent Women Filmmakers Phase I and II. Report prepared for Sundance Institute and
Women in Film Los Angeles, Female Filmmakers Initiative.
32. Parker, K. (2015, March 10). Despite progress, women still bear heavier load than men in balancing work and
family. Pew Research Center. Available:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/03/10/women-still-bear-
heavier-load-than-men-balancing-work-family/. Family Caregiving Alliance. (2019). https://www.caregiver.org/
33. Yap, M., & Konrad, A. M. (2009). Gender and racial differentials in promotions: Is there a sticky floor, a mid-level
bottleneck, or a glass ceiling?. Relations industrielles/Industrial Relations, 64(4), 593-619. Hite, L. M. (2004). Black
and white women managers: Access to opportunity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15(2), 131-146.
Giscombe, K., & Mattis, M. C. (2002). Leveling the playing field for women of color in corporate management: Is the
business case enough? Journal of Business Ethics, 37(1), 103-119. Hegewisch, A. & Williams-Baron, E. (2018, March
7). The Gender Wage Gap: 2017 Earnings Differences by Race and Ethnicity. Institute for Women’s Policy Research.
Available: https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/C464_Gender-Wage-Gap-2.pdf
.
34. Smith, S.L., Choueiti, M., Choi, A., & Pieper, K. (2019). Inclusion in the Director’s Chair: Gender, Race, & Age of
Directors Across 1,200 Top Films from 2007 to 2018. Annenberg Inclusion Initiative. University of Southern
California. http://assets.uscannenberg.org/docs/inclusion-in-the-directors-chair-2019.pdf
. Choueiti, M., Smith, S.L.,
& Pieper, K. (2018). Critic’s Choice 2: Gender and Race/Ethnicity of Film Reviewers Across 300 Top Films from 2015-
2017. Annenberg Inclusion Initiative. University of Southern California.
http://assets.uscannenberg.org/docs/critics-
choice-2.pdf. Directors Guild of America (2018). DGA Report: Higher Percentage of Directing Jobs Are Going to
Women and Directors of Color, but Overall Picture is Mixed. Available:
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2018/181010-Episodic-Television-Director-Diversity-Report.aspx.
35. Pieper, K., Choueiti, M. & Smith, S.L. (2014). Race and Ethnicity in Independent Films: Prevalence of
Underrepresented Directors and the Barriers They Face. Working Paper.
36. Cadinu, M. & Galdi, S. (2012). Gender differences in implicit gender self-categorization lead to stronger gender
self-stereotyping by women than men. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 546-551. Sinclair, S., Hardin, C.D.,
& Lowery, B.S. (2006). Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 90(4), 529-542.
37. Yoder, J.D., Schleicher, T.L., & McDonald, T.W. (1998). Empowering token women leaders: The importance of
organizationally legitimated credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 209-222.
38. American Civil Liberties Union (2018). Inclusion targets: What's legal.
https://www.aclusocal.org/en/inclusion-
targets-whats-legal
