Dr. Mario's 2nd 🧠

📜 Gender Stereotypes and Workplace Bias

12 min read

Highlights

The paper discusses how descriptive gender stereotypes promote gender bias because of the negative performance expectations that result from the perception that there is a poor fit between what women are like and the attributes believed necessary for successful performance in male gender-typed positions and roles. (View Highlight)

Descriptive gender stereotypes designate what women and men are like. Prescriptive gender stereotypes designate what women and men should be like. (View Highlight)

2. Descriptive gender stereotypes

…researchers have identified the attributes that are thought to characterize men and women (Abele, 2003; Bakan, 1966; Broverman, Vogel, Borverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1972; Diekman & Eagly, 2000) (View Highlight)

Agency is often taken to be the defining characteristic of the male stereotype.

and communality as the defining characteristic of the female stereotype.

Agency has come to denote achievement orientation (e.g., competent, ambitious, task-focused), inclination to take charge (assertive, dominant, forceful), autonomy (e.g., independent, self-reliant, decisive) and rationality (e.g., analytical, logical, objective).

Communality, on the other hand, has come to denote concern for others (e.g., kind, caring, considerate), affiliative tendencies (e.g., warm, friendly, collaborative), deference (e.g., obedient, respectful, self-effacing) and emotional sensitivity (e.g., perceptive, intuitive, understanding). (View Highlight)

stereotypes serve as heuristics or shortcuts for forming impressions about people. They serve as energy-saving devices, allowing perceivers to form impressions quickly, enabling them to easily respond to and make more predictable the highly complex world confronting them (Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994, p. 37). Moreover, descriptive stereotypes can exert influence without the perceiver being aware of it. There is evidence that stereotypes are often activated automatically when encountering a member of a stereotyped group, although they are not necessarily acted upon (Devine, 1989; Dovidio, Evans, & Tyler, 1986) (View Highlight)

2.1. Lack of fit and the formation of performance expectations

Leadership is still a male thing:

These male gender-typed positions, which include top management and executive positions, are believed to necessitate characteristics that coincide with stereotypic conceptions of men, but not with stereotypic conceptions of women (Gaucher, Friesen & Kay, 2011; Heilman et al., 1989) (View Highlight)

Despite the fact that communal traits and behaviors such as interpersonal skills and the ability to develop new talent are increasingly becoming valued leadership and managerial characteristics (Eagly & Carli, 2003)…

… the perception of what it takes to be a successful in these positions remains largely tied to agentic qualities (Schein, 2001).

They are still thought to require an achievement oriented aggressiveness and emotional toughness that is contrary to the stereotyped view of what women are like (View Highlight)

In early work on this issue, it was found that when respondents, both male and female, were asked to identify the attributes of men in general, of women in general and of successful managers, the characterization of successful managers were more congruent with the characterization of men than of women (Schein, 1973, 1975). (View Highlight)

even when respondents were asked specifically about the attributes of male and female managers; male managers were described as more similar to successful managers than were female managers. (View Highlight)

The general idea that we ‘‘think manager, think male’’ seems to live on. (View Highlight)

2.2. Stereotype-based performance expectations and information processing

Three gender-dependent mechanisms affect proper information processing:

Attention (…) information that is inconsistent with expectations often is not even noticed (View Highlight)

Interpretation (…) a course of action may be seen as flexible when performed by a man, but as weak or indecisive when performed by a woman. Or delaying making a decision may be seen as prudent when the decision maker is a man, but as timid or passive when the decision maker is a woman. The meaning attached to a particular behavior can vary greatly depending upon the expectations held (View Highlight)

Recall (…) People have been shown to recall more expectation-consistent than inconsistent information about another, even falsely ‘‘remembering’’ expectation-consistent behaviors that did not actually occur (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990; Higgins & Bargh, 1987). (View Highlight)

2.3. Lack of fit, performance expectations and career consequences

Lyness and Heilman (2006), for example, found that in a large financial services company women were evaluated less favorably than men in line jobs (which tend to be male gender-typed), but not in staff jobs (View Highlight)

affirmative action policies (Heilman, Block, & Stathatos, 1997) and diversity initiatives (Heilman & Welle, 2006), both intended to help women and other minorities, have been found to instead sometimes promote stereotyping and negative evaluation (View Highlight)

2.4. The facilitating effects of ambiguity

Ambiguity permits expectations to flourish. The more ambiguity, the more necessity there is for inference, and the less evident is the ‘‘accurate’’ evaluative judgment. Thus, ambiguity provides a facilitative environment for gender bias (Nieva & Gutek, 1980), fueling subjectivity and giving free reign to cognitive distortion in information processing (Heilman & Haynes, 2006) (View Highlight)

‘‘Joan versus John’’ studies, in which respondents evaluated fictitious targets whose sex is manipulated, demonstrated the less favorable evaluation of women as compared to men particularly when there is little information about the target (Swim, Borgida, Maruyama, & Myers, 1989 (View Highlight)

Information that provides a mixed profile – one in which some aspects are strong and others are not, necessitates weighing one piece of information against another – a process that leaves much to the discretion of the evaluator. When discretion is to be exercised, expectations are likely to exert influence by helping ‘‘tip the scales’’ as to what information is given most attention, often to the detriment of women (Uhlmann & Cohen, 2005 (View Highlight)

2.5. Effects on women’s self-evaluations

Gender stereotypes not only affect how women are evaluated by others, but also affect how women evaluate themselves (View Highlight)

Research has verified that women approach male gender-typed tasks with less confidence and more trepidation than do men, and that without being given reason to think otherwise, their sense of competence on such tasks is low. In one study it was shown that women’s self-ratings of expected task competence did not at all differ from self-ratings of individuals who had actually received negative feedback about their task ability; the only situation in which women’s self-ratings equaled men’s was when they had received direct and credible positive feedback about their ability (Heilman, Lucas, & Kaplow, 1990). (View Highlight)

2.6. Deterring gender bias arising from descriptive gender stereotypes

gender is made salient by numerical scarcity, and it recedes as a defining element when women are ‘‘clustered (View Highlight)

Efforts to broaden conceptions of what it takes to do these jobs – much of which concerns stereotypically female people skills – have been shown to alleviate some negative consequences (Gaucher et al., 2011) (View Highlight)

there is some indication that communal traits and behaviors are becoming valued leadership characteristics (see Eagly & Carli, 2003 (View Highlight)

3. Prescriptive gender stereotypes

3.1. Engaging in “Should nots”

If women are to succeed in upper level work settings they have to violate gender stereotypic prescriptions. They have to be able to compete aggressively for positions, to act independently and decisively, and to take charge when the situation requires it.

But such behaviors are counter to the directives inherent in gender stereotype prescriptions. What happens when women exhibit these stereotypically male attributes and behaviors? More often than not, they are seen as acting in ways that are reserved for men but prohibited for women, and disapproval and penalties result. Therefore, even when women seek to distinguish themselves from descriptive gender stereotypes and demonstrate that they have what it takes to fulfill traditionally male positions, they are likely to suffer negative consequences. (View Highlight)

Leadership is often regarded as a traditionally male role (e.g., Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari, 2011), but research indicates that one set of leadership styles are viewed as appropriate for men and another for women. (View Highlight)

In their meta-analysis, Eagly et al. (1992) found that women were evaluated more negatively than men when they adopted autocratic or directive leadership styles – styles that deviate from communal and non-aggressive stereotypic prescriptions for women’s behavior – but women were not evaluated more negatively than men when they adopted a more stereotype consistent and gender-neutral democratic style of leadership. In addition, differences have been found in reactions to the way discipline is administered; female leaders have been found to be most effective when they discipline their subordinates in a private manner using two-way communication – a gender appropriate leadership style termed as ‘‘considerate’’ (Brett, Atwater, & Waldman, 2005). These findings demonstrate that women are penalized for engaging in leadership behaviors that are effective for men. (View Highlight)

An example, self-promotion:

Such behavior is, however, antithetical to gender prescriptions for women to be modest and uncompetitive. It therefore is no surprise that although self-promotion has been found to enhance assessments of competence for both men and women, it results in women, but not men, being viewed as less socially appealing (Rudman, 1998).

3.2. Failing to do the “Shoulds”

A central part of the female gender prescription is that women be kind and considerate, and that they provide help to others when needed. (View Highlight)

Accordingly, it is believed that women should engage in altruistic behavior when the opportunity presents itself. (…) Moreover, when they are altruistic their altruism is likely to be seen as due to the gender prescription (View Highlight)

Using organizational data, Allen (2006) provided additional support for the idea that performing organizational citizenship behaviors, of which altruism is one, have a greater effect on the salary and promotions of men than women. (View Highlight)

…women who choose not to be collaborative, but rather to be individualistic or competitive in their orientation, will not be regarded favorably. (View Highlight)

Gender stereotypes also dictate that women should be sensitive to the feelings of others (View Highlight)

3.4. Success as a violation

Women can also be penalized for merely exhibiting competence and success in male gender-typed positions. (View Highlight)

Indeed, research tracking the advancement of 30,000 managers, controlling for age, organizational tenure and education, indicates that promotion becomes increasingly difficult for women as compared to men as they move up the organizational ladder (Lyness & Judiesch, 1999, suggesting that women encounter added obstacles when they have reached positions of success. (View Highlight)

Paradoxically, success begets negativity. Successful women in male gender-typed fields have been shown to be disliked and personally derogated (View Highlight)

Note: 📖 The myth of the nice girl

4.1. What about men?

Our ideas should have implications not only for women but also for men. They, too, should experience penalties for violating prescriptive gender stereotypes. (View Highlight)

The prescription for men involves being agentic, and when men fail to act in accordance with it, disapproval results (View Highlight)

  • Note: This is the case for gay men

The ‘‘should nots’’ for men involve behaviors that are highly communal in nature, and typically are reserved for women. (View Highlight)

… when they request a family leave, men more than women suffer negativity in perceptions of their work ethic (Wayne & Cordeiro, 2003), in recommended rewards (Allen & Russell, 1999) and in suggested penalties (Rudman & Mescher, in press) (View Highlight)

If our ideas are correct, then men also should be penalized when the job at which they are successful is not gender consistent – when it is thought to require feminine rather than masculine attributes for success. Just as success in traditionally male positions implies a lack of femininity for women, success in traditionally female positions ought to imply a lack of masculinity for men. But what would penalties for men be? Penalties for women – dislike and perceptions of interpersonal hostility – are in the domain most central to the female stereotype, communality. Thus penalties for men should be in the agency domain, which is integral to the male stereotype. In a study examining the way in which men who succeed at female gender-typed jobs were evaluated, the findings supported this idea (Heilman & Wallen, 2010). (View Highlight)

These findings appear to be at odds with research indicating that men ride the ‘‘glass elevator’’ in female occupations, receiving greater organizational rewards and making quicker career progress than similarly qualified women (Williams, 1992). But there also is evidence that men’s comparative advantage over women in female gender-typed jobs is less than in gender-neutral jobs (Budig, 2002). (View Highlight)

4.2. Lack of differences between male and female evaluatiors

One would think that women would differ from men in their tendency to engage in gender bias. However, data indicate otherwise. In the vast majority of studies conducted on gender stereotypes, no differences have been found in the reactions of male and female respondents. This finding is puzzling. (View Highlight)

5. Summary and conclusions

…there is evidence that, at least at the upper levels of management, women are sometimes evaluated more favorably than their male counterparts (Rosette & Tost, 2010). It is notable, however, that this research indicated the tendency to value women more favorably than men only at the very highest management level; women still were disadvantaged in evaluation in the positions they most often populate, and in the positions which serve as stepping stones to the top (View Highlight)

In fact, recent research suggests that while women are still seen in traditionally stereotypic terms – as more communal and less agentic than men, they now are seen as equal to men in intelligence and competence (Hentschel et al., 2013). This revision of the female gender stereotype content, if it is indicative of a trend, bodes well for women’s opportunities in the workforce. It suggests that there is a distinction to be made between perceived agency and perceived competence, and that if leadership success is thought to rely on competence and not just on agenticism, there will be improvement in women’s perceived fit with the role. (View Highlight)

Graph View

Backlinks