No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Third-Party Prejudice Accommodation Increases Gender Discrimination
Abstract
We investigated how gatekeepers sometimes arrive at discriminatory hiring selections to accommodate prejudiced third parties due to role demands (i.e., the “third-party prejudice effect”). Studies 1 and 2 show that individuals in charge of personnel decisions were significantly less likely to select a woman when a relevant third party (the chief executive officer of the company in Study 1; the “proposer” in an ultimatum game in Study 2) was prejudiced against women. Gatekeepers accommodate third-party prejudice in this way in order to avoid conflict in relations and task-related problems that would likely occur if the gatekeeper introduced a member of the target of prejudice into an organization. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that both interpersonal and task-focused concerns significantly mediated third-party prejudice accommodation. Furthermore, experimentally reducing task-focused concerns significantly reduced the accommodation of third-party prejudice against women (Study 4). We also found that gatekeepers accommodate third-party prejudice regardless of their own beliefs and attitudes (Studies 5 and 6), or their own desire to get along or affiliate with the third party (Study 7), and despite leading to feelings of guilt (Studies 4 and 5). Both men and women accommodated third-party prejudice against women. A role-based framework can be useful to understand the persistence of gender inequality in various fields and organizations, even as individuals endorse increasingly gender-egalitarian views.
... Individuals operate in accordance with what they see as the demands of their formal role [10,11], and when making recruitment decisions on behalf of others, this role construal can lead professionals to align their hiring decisions with the perceived biases (prejudice, stereotyping, and/or discriminatory actions) of relevant third parties. This bias accommodation process has been labelled the "third-party prejudice effect" and has only very recently been established in psychological experiments [12,13]. Crucially, in the current work, we propose that the influence of third-party bias depends in part on the way that individuals construe the hiring manager role-a construal that is likely shaped by professionals' training, personal histories and attitudes, and belief systems. ...
... Given substantial evidence that hiring discrimination contributes to persistent gender segregation in the labor market [14], we focus our research on hiring discrimination as a result of the inferred gender biases of a relevant third party. Throughout this investigation, we refer to the consequence of accommodating third-party bias on employment decisions as "hiring discrimination," defined as excluding candidates based on group membership regardless of their qualifications, in this case, due to the perceived gender bias of a third party [12,13]. ...
... We approach bias accommodation within the theoretical framework of role theory [15,16], and we test how professional hiring managers' role construal (i.e., their understanding of the formal demands of being in a hiring role) may influence their views about bias accommodation in hiring contexts. Whereas past work with nonprofessional samples manipulated the contextual strength of role-related concerns to examine the influence of role demands on bias accommodation [12,13], the current investigation is the first to examine how pre-existing individual differences in the endorsement of specific role duties-the beliefs about their role that hiring professionals bring to the table-may promote hiring discrimination as a result of bias accommodation. In doing this, we contribute to a more thorough understanding of the third-party bias effect by testing individual differences rather than situational factors that contribute to it. ...
We theorize that individuals’ pre-existing beliefs about the hiring manager role (role construal) are associated with their tendency to condone bias accommodation in hiring contexts, in which a person aligns hiring decisions with the perceived biases of others. In two studies, we focus on human resources (HR) professionals’ endorsement of the role demand to prioritize candidate fit with others (e.g., supervisor) when making hiring decisions. Study 1 examined bias accommodation from a vicarious perspective, revealing that role demand endorsement is positively associated with viewing it as acceptable and common for another hiring manager to accommodate third-party bias against women. Study 2 examined bias accommodation experimentally from an actor’s perspective, showing lower preference for and selection of a female (vs. male) job candidate in the presence of cues to third-party bias against women, but only when role demand endorsement is relatively high. HR professionals in both studies indicated that third-party bias influences in hiring are relatively common. Responses in Study 2 provide preliminary evidence that the phenomenon of third-party bias accommodation might be relevant in the context of employment discrimination based on group characteristics other than gender (e.g., race/ethnicity, age). We discuss the practical implications of our findings for hiring professionals and for organizations seeking to increase diversity in their workforce.
... Roles can also induce individuals to channel group-based biases as they strive to meet the goals associated with those roles. As a consequence, occupying particular roles can lead individuals to behave toward members of underrepresented groups in ways that perpetuate social disadvantage-often in ways that are inconsistent with individuals' personal attitudes and beliefs (Vial, Brescoll, & Dovidio, 2018). In the current investigation, we examined how the demands of the roles that people occupy sometimes contribute to the spread of prejudice and the maintenance of group inequality. ...
... In the present research, we offer insights into why people may exhibit or perpetuate bias due to the demands of the roles that they occupy. We extend recent research by Vial et al. (2018) indicating that role demands nudge individuals to engage in discriminatory behavior when they occupy a "gatekeeper role," that is, when they control access to resources or membership in a group or organization. We examined various gatekeeper roles that entailed the responsibility of making a hiring decision or recommendation. ...
... We examined various gatekeeper roles that entailed the responsibility of making a hiring decision or recommendation. Vial et al. (2018) proposed that role demands can help explain why other peoples' biases sometimes influence individuals' hiring decisions involving female job candidates (the "third-party prejudice effect"). They found that individuals whose roles require them to hire other people tend to accommodate the perceived gender-based prejudices of existing organizational members when evaluating job candidates. ...
Five studies illuminate how the demands of the roles that people occupy can sometimes contribute to the maintenance of group inequality by promoting the accommodation of others' biases, even when those biases disadvantage an in-group or clash with personal views. When role demands to maximize candidate fit in hiring selections were strong, preference for job candidates of a given group tended to be lower when there were cues to third-party prejudice against that group (vs. no cues), irrespective of in-group favoritism effects (Studies 1-5) or participant attitudes (Studies 4 and 5). We found supporting evidence for the underlying processes in the context of hiring selections involving fictional groups (Study 1) as well as female job candidates (Studies 2-5). A concern with meeting the demands of the gatekeeper role was at the root of prejudice accommodation: When role-demands to prioritize candidate fit were strong, role-relevant considerations (interpersonal and task-fo-cused) mediated the accommodation effect (Studies 1 and 4). The more gatekeepers in charge of hiring sought to meet role demands by considering the preferences of relevant third parties, the more they accommodated third-party prejudice (Study 2). Moreover, role-based concerns mediated the accommodation of prejudice-but not other potential considerations that were unrelated to role demands (Study 3). Finally, the accommodation effect was eliminated when the role definition did not prioritize candidate fit (Study 4) and when we experimentally reduced the strength of role-related concerns (Study 5). These findings illustrate the relevance of the role concept for understanding the social transmission of bias.
... These authors found that the reason Black participants derogated the Native American candidates was because they perceived that such behavior was more aligned with Whites' racial attitude norms. Similarly, Vial et al. (2019) found that, regardless of their own beliefs or preferences, people were less likely to select a female job candidate when making hiring recommendations to those they believed to be biased against women. In other words, the belief that decision makers held prejudicial attitudes toward women drove individuals themselves to discriminate against women, thereby contributing to the reinforcement of sexism. ...
... Proximal norms encompass what others have referred to as local (Fornara et al., 2011) or provincial norms (Goldstein et al., 2008), and are derived from one's close reference group (Miller & Prentice, 2016;Paluck & Shepherd, 2012). The specification of close reference groups can be based on social factors-such as a shared social identity, perceived similarity, or functional interdependence (e.g., college students at the same school; Crandall et al., 2002;Goldstein et al., 2008;Shapiro & Neuberg, 2008;Vial et al., 2019)-or factors such as geophysical location (e.g., living in the same neighborhood; Miller & Prentice, 2016;Passafaro et al., 2019). The main idea is that these groups are more psychologically proximal to perceivers, and thus their norms may be more closely tailored to perceivers' immediate social context. ...
The last few years have been a testament to the fact that anti-Black racism is alive and well in America. It manifests not only in macro-level indicators of social inequity (e.g., housing, education) but also manifests within individual organizations. Importantly, individuals in organizations can endorse anti-Black attitudes and other racist sentiments that influence others’ expressions of bias. In the current research, we examine the power of proximal organizational norms in two studies. In Study 1, 269 participants heard a member of their organization condone or condemn anti-Black attitudes and were then asked to give their own attitudes about Black Americans. Results revealed that participants were strongly influenced by the organization member’s stance on anti-Black racism; compared to those in the control condition, those who heard an organizational peer condone anti-Black attitudes were also more likely to condone, and those who heard an organizational peer condemn these attitudes were also more likely to condemn. In Study 2, we continued to examine the impact of norms on expressions of anti-Black bias by investigating the relationship between bias expression and both proximal (within an organization) and distal (within a more socially and physically distant reference group, i.e., country) norms. Consistent with Study 1, results from 183 participants showed that the proximal norms (but not the distal norms) were strongly related to the expression of anti-Black bias. We discuss the results by considering the critical role that both individual workplace allies and collective organizations can play in shaping the expression of anti-Black bias.
... 4 We strongly encourage employers to avoid assessments of organizational fit and what hiring agents call "culture fit," as well as impressionistic "fuzzy" fit, in cybervetting and throughout the hiring process in general. Hiring on P-O and cultural fit is linked to race, gender, and other forms of bias, which may lead recruiters to select based on similarity to self (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005;Rivera, 2015), to assess different forms of fit for applicants of different ethnicities (Wolgast et al., 2018), and to accommodate coworker prejudices, even against their own beliefs and group identities (Vial et al., 2019). Emphasizing these forms of fit in hiring could lead to suboptimal candidate selections, increase organizations' exposure to litigation, and promote innovation-stifling "group think" (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). ...
Cybervetting is the widespread practice of employers culling information from social media and/or other internet sources to screen and select job candidates. Research evaluating online screening is still in its infancy; that which exists often assumes that it offers value and utility to employers as long as they can avoid discrimination claims. Given the increasing prevalence of cybervetting, it is extremely important to probe its challenges and limitations. We seek to initiate a discussion about the negative consequences of online screening and how they can be overcome. We draw on previous literature and our own data to assess the implications of cybervetting for three key stakeholders: job candidates, hiring agents, and organizations. We also discuss future actions these stakeholders can take to manage and ameliorate harmful outcomes of cybervetting. We argue that it is the responsibility of the organizations engaged in cybervetting to identify specific goals, develop formal policies and practices, and continuously evaluate outcomes so that negative societal consequences are minimized. Should they fail to do so, professional and industry associations as well as government can and should hold them accountable.
... When people believe certain biases are widely shared, justified, or not applicable to them, they may feel morally licenced to engage in bias (Crandall & Eshleman, 2003). For example, third-party prejudice may occur where people enact biases that they believe others in positions of power hold and would support, even if they personally do not (Vial et al., 2018). To guard against these challenges, organisations should consider putting initiatives in place to not only initiate but also sustain inclusive norms (see Section 3.4). ...
We review a program of work articulating the concept of inclusion – and approaches for achieving it – for women working in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Maths (STEM) organisations. A multi-level framework is described to characterise inclusion in STEM workplaces. This framework is then used to conceptualise a series of empirical studies exploring women’s experiences of STEM work cultures. Together, these studies show that identity-based inclusion is the product of institutional policies and practices, interpersonal dynamics, and individuals’ beliefs and biases. We then use our multi-level framework to discuss practical insights for creating inclusive cultures in STEM organisations. We offer a series of empirically informed actionable suggestions for spreading and establishing inclusive norms in STEM organisations. Our framework suggests that creating contexts where employees can effectively learn inclusive norms will help organisations construct gender inclusive work cultures in STEM.
... First, the real or imagined presence of prejudiced others may activate BIASes people neither endorse nor are aware they harbor. Vial et al. (2019) demonstrated that people make biased and discriminatory hiring decisions that go against their own beliefs if they believe their supervisor is prejudiced. Although they may do so out of a fear of punishment, desire to curry favor, or motivation for conformity, it is plausible that the mere presence of prejudiced others could itself increase the likelihood that BIASes are activated. ...
There is a critical disconnect between scientific knowledge about the nature of bias and how this knowledge gets translated into organizational debiasing efforts. Conceptual confusion around what implicit bias is contributes to misunderstanding. Bridging these gaps is the key to understanding when and why antibias interventions will succeed or fail. Notably, there are multiple distinct pathways to biased behavior, each of which requires different types of interventions. To bridge the gap between public understanding and psychological research, we introduce a visual typology of bias that summarizes the process by which group-relevant cognitions are expressed as biased behavior. Our typology spotlights cognitive, motivational, and situational variables that affect the expression and inhibition of biases while aiming to reduce the ambiguity of what constitutes implicit bias. We also address how norms modulate how biases unfold and are perceived by targets. Using this typology as a framework, we identify theoretically distinct entry points for antibias interventions. A key insight is that changing associations, increasing motivation, raising awareness, and changing norms are distinct goals that require different types of interventions targeting individual, interpersonal, and institutional structures. We close with recommendations for antibias training grounded in the science of prejudice and stereotyping.
... Prior research suggests that pragmatic bias may be a salient concern disadvantaging women and minorities in electoral contexts-particularly in primary elections-in which traditionally underrepresented groups are perceived to be less electable (32,33). Beyond electoral contexts, there is evidence that people withhold support for women they would otherwise support in nontraditional domains when faced with pragmatic concerns, such as anticipated bias from others (30,34,35). More generally, the logic of pragmatic bias is also supported by research on the role of efficacy in collective action settings, which finds that individuals are reluctant to join social movements on issues like climate change, gun control reform, or health care when they believe that the collective effort is unlikely to succeed (36)(37)(38). ...
Significance
Women remain underrepresented in political leadership in the United States and beyond. While abundant research has studied the possible impact of gender stereotypes on support for women candidates, our research finds that voters also withhold support for women candidates because they perceive practical barriers to women successfully attaining political leadership positions. We find that providing Democratic primary voters with evidence that women earn as much electoral support as men in US general elections increased intentions to vote for women candidates. Our results suggest that women face complex barriers that prevent gender equity in politics, and these barriers can be reduced when voters believe that Americans not only want but also will take action to support women candidates.
... • Disadvantage in hiring and promotions: The bias that can negatively affect an individual applicant's hiring or promotion success comes in two forms: Direct bias caused by a hiring manager's bias affecting their own decision (Axt & Lai, 2019), or indirect bias caused by channeling the bias of another (like the previous example of the professor's wife; Vial et al., 2018). ...
Conscious “excluders,” who despite various corporate interventions, continue to treat some folks differently due to their social group membership, may help explain the recent stagnation in progress toward gender equality in organizational leadership. While excluders’ excuses for such behavior vary, the outcome is quite consistent: Excluders disadvantage women’s employment opportunities, perpetuating inequality in various ways. The authors present five concrete practices to try to keep excluders out of your organization in the first place and to identify and appropriately deal with those who are already there. But, this story of exclusion isn’t exclusive to gender diversity. These practices can detect the bad apples who exclude women, mothers, childfree women, people with disabilities, members of racial and ethnic minorities, mature employees, LGBTQ+ persons, etc.
... The underlying "think manager, think male" cognitive prototype is common across nations and generations (Eagly & Karau, 2002;Heilman, 2001;Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari, 2011;Schein, Mueller, Lituchy, & Liu, 1996). Discrimination against female job candidates can also result from perceptions-correct or incorrect-about the sexist biases of superiors, clients, and customers (Trentham & Larwood, 1998;Vial, Brescoll, & Dovidio, 2019). Although experimental studies also find that the causal contribution of a strong versus weak resume is substantial (Olian et al., 1988), gender biases may coexist with and even co-opt seemingly meritocratic selection criteria (Norton, Vandello, & Darley, 2004;Uhlmann & Cohen, 2005). ...
It is widely acknowledged that subgroup bias can influence hiring evaluations. However, the notion that bias still threatens equitable hiring outcomes in modern employment contexts continues to be debated, even among organizational scholars. In this study, we sought to contextualize this debate by estimating the practical impact of bias on real-world hiring outcomes (a) across a wide range of hiring scenarios and (b) in the presence of diversity-oriented staffing practices. Toward this end, we conducted a targeted meta-analysis of recent hiring experiments that manipulated both candidate gender and qualifications to couch our investigation within ongoing debates surrounding the impact of small amounts of bias in otherwise meritocratic hiring contexts. Consistent with prior research, we found evidence of small gender bias effects ( d = −0.30) and large qualification effects ( d = 1.61) on hiring managers’ evaluations of candidate hireability. We then used these values to inform the starting parameters of a large-scale computer simulation designed to model conventional processes by which candidates are recruited, evaluated, and selected for open positions. Collectively, our simulation findings empirically substantiate assertions that even seemingly trivial amounts of subgroup bias can produce practically significant rates of hiring discrimination and productivity loss. Furthermore, we found contextual factors can alter but cannot obviate the consequences of biased evaluations, even within apparently optimal hiring scenarios (e.g., when extremely valid assessments are used). Finally, our results demonstrate residual amounts of subgroup bias can undermine the effectiveness of otherwise successful targeted recruitment efforts. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual's facial expressions can influence their emotional experience (e.g., that smiling can make one feel happier). However, a reoccurring concern is that supposed facial feedback effects are merely methodological artifacts. Six experiments conducted across 29 countries (N = 995) examined the extent to which the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports were moderated by (a) the hypothesis communicated to participants (i.e., demand characteristics) and (b) participants' beliefs about facial feedback effects. Results indicated that these methodological artifacts moderated, but did not fully account for, the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports. Even when participants were explicitly told or personally believed that facial poses do not influence emotions, they still exhibited facial feedback effects. These results indicate that facial feedback effects are not solely driven by demand or placebo effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Dominant actors are neither liked nor respected, yet they are reliably deferred to. Extant explanations of why dominant actors are deferred to focus on deferrers' first-order judgments (i.e., the deferrers' own private assessment of the dominant actor). The present research extends these accounts by considering the role of second-order judgments (i.e., an individual's perception of what others think about the dominant actor) in decisions to defer to dominant actors. While individuals themselves often have little respect for dominant actors, we hypothesized that (1) they think others respect dominant actors more than they do themselves, and (2) these second-order respect judgments are associated with their decision to defer dominant actors above and beyond their own first-order respect judgments. The results of four studies provide support for these hypotheses: across a variety of contexts, we found evidence that individuals think others respect dominant actors more than they themselves do (Studies 1–3), and perceptions of others' respect for dominant actors is associated with individuals' own decisions to defer to them, above and beyond first-order respect (Studies 3–4). Results highlight the importance of considering second-order judgments in order to fully understand why dominant actors achieve high social rank in groups and organizations.
While the 2020 Democratic field was touted as one of the most diverse in presidential nomination history, a white, male, heterosexual candidate ultimately won the nomination. This is, on its face, surprising, as we might expect less sexism and more enthusiasm for diverse candidates among Democratic voters. To help explain this outcome, we refocus attention on the “third-person effect” and the anticipated reactions of others to a female candidate, rather than voters own individual beliefs in two ways. First, we demonstrate that attitudes about female presidential candidates still follow third-person effect predictions; individuals attribute socially desirable attitudes to themselves and less so more distant others (i.e. “Americans”). Second, we analyze how voters take into account perceived potential gender bias by others, which in turn influences female candidates’ perceived electability (likely support from other voters). Gendered electability then has measurable impacts on preference for female candidates, as they strategically choose the more electable candidate. Overall, these results demonstrate looking at the anticipated gender bias of others, rather than just an individual’s attitudes, can be helpful in explaining the continued perception of female presidential candidates as less electable and, ultimately, why women have not yet broken the highest glass ceiling.
Prior work suggests that high-status group members are favored for hierarchy-maintaining roles, while low-status group members are favored for hierarchy-attenuating ones—but the mechanisms driving this phenomenon are largely unknown. The current work examines this phenomenon in the domain of race, testing three potential mechanisms: role status, representativeness, and hierarchy profiling. According to a role status account, hierarchy-maintaining roles are seen as higher-status than hierarchy-attenuating ones, driving effects. A representativeness account suggests that hierarchy-maintaining roles are seen as including more White (or fewer minority) job-holders than hierarchy-attenuating ones, driving effects. Finally, a hierarchy profiling account suggests that evaluators see the typical hire for hierarchy-maintaining roles as more conservative (or less liberal), driving effects. In three studies, White evaluators rated a White male applicant a better fit for a hierarchy-maintaining role (e.g., CEO of a hedge fund) than a hierarchy-attenuating one (e.g., CEO of a nonprofit). There was, however, no impact of a role's perceived impact on inequality on ratings of Black male or Latino applicant fit (Studies 1–3). This effect persisted regardless of role status (Study 2), negating a role status account. However, a final study supported representativeness and hierarchy profiling accounts. White evaluators rated the typical hire for a hierarchy-maintaining role as more White and conservative, mediating ratings of White applicant fit (Study 3). Three supplemental studies replicated all results. Findings reveal the mechanisms that can hold social hierarchy in place, keeping high-status group members in hierarchy-maintaining roles and low-status group members in hierarchy-attenuating ones.
#MeToo has inspired the voices of millions of people (mostly women) to speak up about sexual harassment at work. The high-profile cases that reignited this movement have revealed that sexual harassment is and has been shrouded in silence, sometimes for decades. In the face of sexual harassment, managers, witnesses and targets often remain silent, wittingly or unwittingly protecting perpetrators and allowing harassment to persist. In this integrated conceptual review, we introduce the concept of network silence around sexual harassment, and theorize that social network compositions and belief systems can promote network silence. Specifically, network composition (harasser and male centrality) and belief systems (harassment myths and valorizing masculinity) combine to instill network silence around sexual harassment. Moreover, such belief systems elevate harassers and men to central positions within networks, who in turn may promote problematic belief systems, creating a mutually reinforcing dynamic. We theorize that network silence contributes to the persistence of sexual harassment due to the lack of consequences for perpetrators and support for victims, which further reinforces silence. Collectively, this process generates a culture of sexual harassment. We identify ways that organizations can employ an understanding of social networks to intervene in the social forces that give rise to silence surrounding sexual harassment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
Scholarship produced by psychologists typically focuses on one area of social identity and oppression per study (e.g., only sexism) with very little intersectional analysis across systemic oppression and privilege. To better understand the intersecting patterns of ally behavior, we examined online confrontation behavior by privileged individuals in response to antigay, antitransgender, and racist comments. Study 1 explored rates and types of confrontation during encounters with anti-Mexican and antigay comments. Study 2 used an experimental design to assess rates and types of confrontation of anti-Arab and antitransgender comments in the presence of a second confederate who either confronted the prejudice or remained silent. When exposed to anti-Mexican bias, men were initially more likely to speak up than women, whereas women were more likely to respond to antigay comments. In terms of anti-Arab and antitransgender bias, social influence resulted in more direct confrontation for anti-Arab statements and higher rates of confrontation for antitransgender bias. Applying an intersectional lens, patterns of power and privilege reveal gender socialization may impact ally responses to racism and antigay bias. For example, gender socialization and stereotypes equating femininity with gay men may both decrease ally behavior among men and increase confrontation of antigay bias among women. When another potential ally is present, social influence appears to become the most powerful predictor of both whether or not a participant confronts bias and how direct they are with the perpetrator. Intersectional examination of invisible norms for promoting ally confrontation informs development of effective equity and justice interventions. © 2020 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues
Although the gender gap in math course-taking and performance has narrowed in recent decades, females continue to be underrepresented in math-intensive fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). Career pathways encompass the ability to pursue a career as well as the motivation to employ that ability. Individual differences in cognitive capacity and motivation are also influenced by broader sociocultural factors. After reviewing research from the fields of psychology, sociology, economics, and education over the past 30 years, we summarize six explanations for US women’s underrepresentation in math-intensive STEM fields: (a) cognitive ability, (b) relative cognitive strengths, (c) occupational interests or preferences, (d) lifestyle values or work-family balance preferences, (e) field-specific ability beliefs, and (f) gender-related stereotypes and biases. We then describe the potential biological and sociocultural explanations for observed gender differences on cognitive and motivational factors and demonstrate the developmental period(s) during which each factor becomes most relevant. We then propose evidence-based recommendations for policy and practice to improve STEM diversity and recommendations for future research directions.
We discuss the complexity of the concept of intergroup reconciliation, offer our definition of it, and identify instrumental and socio-emotional processes as distinct processes that facilitate reconciliation. We then present the needs-based model, according to which conflicts threaten victims' sense of agency and perpetrators' moral image, and social exchange interactions that restore victims' and perpetrators' impaired identities promote reconciliation. We review empirical evidence supporting the model and present extensions of it to ( a) contexts of structural inequality, (b) "dual" conflicts, in which both parties transgress against each other, and (c) contexts in which the restoration of positive identities is external to the victim-perpetrator dyad (e.g., third-parties' interventions). Theoretical and practical implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.
Gender inequality in organizations is a complex phenomenon that can be seen in organizational structures, processes, and practices. For women, some of the most harmful gender inequalities are enacted within human resources (HRs) practices. This is because HR practices (i.e., policies, decision-making, and their enactment) affect the hiring, training, pay, and promotion of women. We propose a model of gender discrimination in HR that emphasizes the reciprocal nature of gender inequalities within organizations. We suggest that gender discrimination in HR-related decision-making and in the enactment of HR practices stems from gender inequalities in broader organizational structures, processes, and practices. This includes leadership, structure, strategy, culture, organizational climate, as well as HR policies. In addition, organizational decision makers' levels of sexism can affect their likelihood of making gender biased HR-related decisions and/or behaving in a sexist manner while enacting HR practices. Importantly, institutional discrimination in organizational structures, processes, and practices play a pre-eminent role because not only do they affect HR practices, they also provide a socializing context for organizational decision makers' levels of hostile and benevolent sexism. Although we portray gender inequality as a self-reinforcing system that can perpetuate discrimination, important levers for reducing discrimination are identified.
We examine time period and generational differences in attitudes toward women’s work and family roles in two large, nationally representative U.S. samples, the Monitoring the Future survey of 12th graders (1976–2013) and the General Social Survey of adults (1977–2012). Twelfth graders became more accepting of working mothers and equal roles for women in the workplace between the 1970s and the 2010s, with most change occurring between the 1970s and the late 1990s. Acceptance of dual-income families and fathers working half-time or not at all (stay-at-home dads) also increased. Thus, for the most part, Millennials (born 1980s–1990s) have continued trends toward more egalitarian gender roles. However, slightly more 12th graders in the 2010s (vs. the late 1990s) favored the husband as the achiever and decision maker in the family. Adults’ attitudes toward working mothers became more egalitarian between the 1970s and the early 1990s, showed a small “backlash” in the late 1990s, and then continued the trend toward increased egalitarianism in the 2000s and 2010s. In hierarchical linear modeling analyses separating the effects of time period, generation/cohort, and age, trends were primarily due to time period with a generational peak in egalitarianism among White women Boomers (born 1946–1964). Policy makers should recognize that support for working mothers is now a solid majority position in the United States and design programs for working families accordingly.
The generic, indeed the defining, task of social psychology is to investigate the interrelationships among society, the social person, and social behavior. Every theoretical perspective or framework in social psychology approaches this immense task by narrowing it, by selecting particular dimensions of society, persons, and behavior as especially worthy of attention. While the ultimate goal for social psychology may be a single, unified theoretical framework sufficiently comprehensive to incorporate “all” the “important” aspects, etc., of the defining conceptual variables of social psychology,1 that goal is not in sight. In the meantime, and before the millenium, all social psychological perspectives or frameworks are partial, selective in their approaches to the world they hope to explicate. That assertion is true of symbolic interactionism, the theoretical framework out of which the theory examined in this chapter develops, although perhaps less so than for most contemporary frameworks in social psychology.
Despite evidence that men are typically perceived as more appropriate and effective than women in leadership positions, a recent debate has emerged in the popular press and academic literature over the potential existence of a female leadership advantage. This meta-analysis addresses this debate by quantitatively summarizing gender differences in perceptions of leadership effectiveness across 99 independent samples from 95 studies. Results show that when all leadership contexts are considered, men and women do not differ in perceived leadership effectiveness. Yet, when other-ratings only are examined, women are rated as significantly more effective than men. In contrast, when self-ratings only are examined, men rate themselves as significantly more effective than women rate themselves. Additionally, this synthesis examines the influence of contextual moderators developed from role congruity theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Our findings help to extend role congruity theory by demonstrating how it can be supplemented based on other theories in the literature, as well as how the theory can be applied to both female and male leaders. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
Dramatic forms of discrimination, such as lynching, property destruction, and hate crimes, are widely understood to be consequences of prejudicial hostility. This article focuses on what has heretofore been only an infrequent countertheme in scientific work on discrimination-that favoritism toward ingroups can be responsible for much discrimination. We extend this counterthesis to the strong conclusion that ingroup favoritism is plausibly more significant as a basis for discrimination in contemporary American society than is outgroup-directed hostility. This conclusion has implications for theory, research methods, and practical remedies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
Existing stereotypes about Black Americans may influence perceptions of intent during financial negotiations. In this study, we explored whether the influence of race on economic decisions extends to choices that are costly to the decision maker. We investigated whether racial group membership contributes to differential likelihood of rejection of objectively equal unfair monetary offers. In the Ultimatum Game, players accept or reject proposed splits of money. Players keep accepted splits, but if a player rejects an offer, both the player and the proposer receive nothing. We found that participants accepted more offers and lower offer amounts from White proposers than from Black proposers, and that this pattern was accentuated for participants with higher implicit race bias. These findings indicate that participants are willing to discriminate against Black proposers even at a cost to their own financial gain.
Attitudes toward female authority and their relationship to gender beliefs were examined using implicit and explicit measures of each. Implicit attitudes covaried with implicit gender authority beliefs (i.e., linking men to high-authority and women to low-authority roles). Explicit attitudes covaried with explicit gender authority beliefs, feminist identification, and hostile sexism. Thus, gender authority beliefs may influence both conscious and unconscious prejudice against female authorities. Although women showed less explicit prejudice than did men, their implicit attitudes were similarly negative. Finally, the relationship found between two different response latency methods (a priming task for attitudes, a categorization task for beliefs) supports the assumption that implicit measures assess similar constructs (i.e., automatic associations in long-term memory).
This study examined the effects of two measures of fit on newcomers' commitment and turnover intentions, P-O fit and P-P fit. Newcomers preferences for organizational cultures were compared with supervisors' and peers' perceptions of organizational culture (P-O fit) and with their preferences for organizational culture (P-P fit). The supervisors and peers that were involved had been the newcomer's recruiters during the selection procedure and they had hired the newcomer. Subjects' culture preferences and perceptions yielded two dimensions of organizational culture: concern for people and concern for goal accomplishment. Results revealed that newcomers' concern for people P-P fit with their supervisor was related to organizational commitment and turnover intentions. P-O fit measures for both dimensions of organizational culture were not related to newcomer affective outcomes.
This article reports a meta-analysis of studies examining the predictive validity of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and explicit measures of bias for a wide range of criterion measures of discrimination. The meta-analysis estimates the heterogeneity of effects within and across 2 domains of intergroup bias (interracial and interethnic), 6 criterion categories (interpersonal behavior, person perception, policy preference, microbehavior, response time, and brain activity), 2 versions of the IAT (stereotype and attitude IATs), 3 strategies for measuring explicit bias (feeling thermometers, multi-item explicit measures such as the Modern Racism Scale, and ad hoc measures of intergroup attitudes and stereotypes), and 4 criterion-scoring methods (computed majority-minority difference scores, relative majority-minority ratings, minority-only ratings, and majority-only ratings). IATs were poor predictors of every criterion category other than brain activity, and the IATs performed no better than simple explicit measures. These results have important implications for the construct validity of IATs, for competing theories of prejudice and attitude-behavior relations, and for measuring and modeling prejudice and discrimination. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research
has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty
exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized
double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly
assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as
significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher
starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect
responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses
indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty
participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against
women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student,
but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias
might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.
Prejudice and discrimination against women has become increasingly subtle and covert (N. V. Benokraitis & J. R. Feagin, 1986). Unlike research on racism, little research about prejudice and discrimination against women has explicitly examined beliefs underlying this more modern form of sexism. Support was found for a distinction between old-fashioned and modern beliefs about women similar to results that have been presented for racism (J. B. McConahay, 1986; D. O. Sears, 1988). The former is characterized by endorsement of traditional gender roles, differential treatment of women and men, and stereotypes about lesser female competence. Like modern racism, modern sexism is characterized by the denial of continued discrimination, antagonism toward women's demands, and lack of support for policies designed to help women (for example, in education and work). Research that compares factor structures of old-fashioned and modern sexism and racism and that validates our modern sexism scale is presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Personal standards for responding toward gay males and affective reactions to discrepancies were examined for low prejudiced (LP) and high prejudiced (HP) Ss in 2 studies. These standards and discrepancies involved responses varying in controllability and acceptability. Results indicated that LP Ss experienced negative self-directed affect in connection with transgressions from their nonprejudiced and well-internalized standards, regardless of the type of response. HP Ss' personal standards were quite nonprejudiced and well internalized for relatively controllable and unacceptable prejudiced responses. Nevertheless, HP Ss' transgressions from their standards produced negative affect directed toward others but not toward the self, regardless of the type of response. The findings supported E. T. Higgins's (1987) argument that the standpoint of standards determines affective reactions to discrepancies. Apparently, LP Ss' standards are based on the own standpoint, but HP Ss' standards are based on the other standpoint. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The authors present a theory of sexism formulated as ambivalence toward women and validate a corresponding measure, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI). The ASI taps 2 positively correlated components of sexism that nevertheless represent opposite evaluative orientations toward women: sexist antipathy or
Hostile Sexism (HS) and a subjectively positive (for sexist men) orientation toward women,
Benevolent Sexism (BS). HS and BS are hypothesized to encompass 3 sources of male ambivalence: Paternalism, Gender Differentiation, and Heterosexuality. Six ASI studies on 2,250 respondents established convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity. Overall ASI scores predict ambivalent attitudes toward women, the HS scale correlates with negative attitudes toward and stereotypes about women, and the BS scale (for nonstudent men only) correlates with positive attitudes and stereotypes about women. A copy of the ASI is provided, with scoring instructions, as a tool for further explorations of sexist ambivalence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders proposes that perceived incongruity between the female gender role and leadership roles leads to 2 forms of prejudice: (a) perceiving women less favorably than men as potential occupants of leadership roles and (b) evaluating behavior that fulfills the prescriptions of a leader role less favorably when it is enacted by a woman. One consequence is that attitudes are less positive toward female than male leaders and potential leaders. Other consequences are that it is more difficult for women to become leaders and to achieve success in leadership roles. Evidence from varied research paradigms substantiates that these consequences occur, especially in situations that heighten perceptions of incongruity between the female gender role and leadership roles.
This paper argues that the group’s task is the most neglected moderator in group research. After offering a broad conception of group task, I draw on various sources to illustrate the powerful moderating role of group task and the field’s broad neglect of this moderation. I conclude with some suggestions for how we might better acknowledge and address the importance of group task for group behavior.
We outline the need to, and provide a guide on how to, conduct a meta-analysis on one's own studies within a manuscript. Although conducting a “mini meta” within one's manuscript has been argued for in the past, this practice is still relatively rare and adoption is slow. We believe two deterrents are responsible. First, researchers may not think that it is legitimate to do a meta-analysis on a small number of studies. Second, researchers may think a meta-analysis is too complicated to do without expert knowledge or guidance. We dispel these two misconceptions by (1) offering arguments on why researchers should be encouraged to do mini metas, (2) citing previous articles that have conducted such analyses to good effect, and (3) providing a user-friendly guide on calculating some meta-analytic procedures that are appropriate when there are only a few studies. We provide formulas for calculating effect sizes and converting effect sizes from one metric to another (e.g., from Cohen's d to r), as well as annotated Excel spreadsheets and a step-by-step guide on how to conduct a simple meta-analysis. A series of related studies can be strengthened and better understood if accompanied by a mini meta-analysis.
In an attempt to explain why the gender gap in leadership positions persists, we propose a model centered on legitimacy. When women hold powerful positions, they have a harder time than men eliciting respect and admiration (i.e., status) from subordinates. As a result, female power-holders are seen as less legitimate than male power-holders. Unless they are able to legitimize their role, relative illegitimacy will prompt a variety of consequences such as more negative subordinate behavior and reduced cooperation when the leader is a woman. Subordinate rejection will likely put female leaders in a precarious mindset, and trigger negative responses toward subordinates; such behavior can confirm negative expectations of female leaders and further undermine female authority in a self-reinforcing cycle of illegitimacy. Leader or organizational features that enhance status attributions and/or lower subordinates' perceptions of power differentials may increase legitimacy for women in leadership roles.
This study examined the nonverbal and verbal expressions of hostile and benevolent sexism. Hostile sexism is sexist antipathy and benevolent sexism is a chivalrous belief that women are warm yet incompetent. We predicted that hostile sexist men would display less affiliative expressions but benevolent sexist men would display more affiliative expressions during mixed-gender interactions. Twenty-seven pairs of U.S. male and female undergraduates from a private university in New England participated in this study. These mixed-gender dyads participated in two social interactions: a structured trivia game followed by an unstructured conversation period. During the trivia game, men with more benevolent sexism were perceived to be more patient overall when waiting for the woman to answer the trivia questions. Furthermore, we examined the men’s nonverbal and verbal expressions during the unstructured interaction—naïve raters made impression ratings of the men’s nonverbal and verbal behavior, and trained coders counted the frequency of specific nonverbal cues (e.g., smiles). A word count software was used for verbal content analysis. As predicted, more hostile sexism was associated with less affiliative nonverbal and verbal expressions (e.g., less approachable, less friendly, and less smiling), but more benevolent sexism was associated with more affiliative nonverbal and verbal expressions (e.g., more approachable, more likely to smile, and more positive word usage). The effects held after controlling for men’s personality traits and partners’ nonverbal behavior. Differential behavioral expressions of benevolent and hostile sexism have theoretical importance as we can examine how sexism maintains the status quo at the interpersonal level.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
This article presents culture as a vehicle of labor market sorting. Providing a case study of hiring in elite professional service firms, I investigate the often suggested but heretofore empirically unexamined hypothesis that cultural similarities between employers and job candidates matter for employers' hiring decisions. Drawing from 120 interviews with employers as well as participant observation of a hiring committee, I argue that hiring is more than just a process of skills sorting; it is also a process of cultural matching between candidates, evaluators, and firms. Employers sought candidates who were not only competent but also culturally similar to themselves in terms of leisure pursuits, experiences, and self-presentation styles. Concerns about shared culture were highly salient to employers and often outweighed concerns about absolute productivity. I unpack the interpersonal processes through which cultural similarities affected candidate evaluation in elite firms and provide the first empirical demonstration that shared culture-particularly in the form of lifestyle markers-matters for employer hiring. I conclude by discussing the implications for scholarship on culture, inequality, and labor markets.
Among the many traditions of research on "identity," two somewhat different yet strongly related strands of identity theory have developed. The first, reflected in the work of Stryker and colleagues, focuses on the linkages of social structures with identities. The second, reflected in the work of Burke and colleagues, focuses on the internal process of self-verification. In the present paper we review each of these strands and then discuss ways in which the two relate to and complement one another. Each provides a context for the other: the relation of social structures to identities influences the process of self-verification, while the process of self-verification creates and sustains social structures. The paper concludes with examples of potentially useful applications of identity theory to other arenas of social psychology, and with a discussion of challenges that identity theory must meet to provide a clear understanding of the relation between self and society.
There is a growing research literature suggesting that racism is an important risk factor undermining the health of Blacks in the United States. Racism can take many forms, ranging from interpersonal interactions to institutional/structural conditions and practices. Existing research, however, tends to focus on individual forms of racial discrimination using self-report measures. Far less attention has been paid to whether structural racism may disadvantage the health of Blacks in the United States. The current study addresses gaps in the existing research by using novel measures of structural racism and by explicitly testing the hypothesis that structural racism is a risk factor for myocardial infarction among Blacks in the United States. State-level indicators of structural racism included four domains: (1) political participation; (2) employment and job status; (3) educational attainment; and (4) judicial treatment. State-level racial disparities across these domains were proposed to represent the systematic exclusion of Blacks from resources and mobility in society. Data on past-year myocardial infarction were obtained from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (non-Hispanic Black: N = 8245; non-Hispanic White: N = 24,507), a nationally representative survey of the U.S. civilian, non-institutionalized population aged 18 and older. Models were adjusted for individual-level confounders (age, sex, education, household income, medical insurance) as well as for state-level disparities in poverty. Results indicated that Blacks living in states with high levels of structural racism were generally more likely to report past-year myocardial infarction than Blacks living in low-structural racism states. Conversely, Whites living in high structural racism states experienced null or lower odds of myocardial infarction compared to Whites living in low-structural racism states. These results raise the provocative possibility that structural racism may not only harm the targets of stigma but also benefit those who wield the power to enact stigma and discrimination.
G*Power (Erdfelder, Faul, & Buchner, 1996) was designed as a general stand-alone power analysis program for statistical tests commonly used in social and behavioral research. G*Power 3 is a major extension of, and improvement over, the previous versions. It runs on widely used computer platforms (i.e., Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Mac OS X 10.4) and covers many different statistical tests of the t, F, and chi2 test families. In addition, it includes power analyses for z tests and some exact tests. G*Power 3 provides improved effect size calculators and graphic options, supports both distribution-based and design-based input modes, and offers all types of power analyses in which users might be interested. Like its predecessors, G*Power 3 is free.
The psychological impact of perceived discrimination varies significantly depending on the extent to which targets expect to be stereotyped (e.g., their level of stigma consciousness). The present research investigated the moderating effect of stigma consciousness on women’s cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses to gender discrimination that differed in the level of situational ambiguity. Female participants imagined themselves applying for and failing to receive a desired job from a male interviewer, whose description was manipulated to reflect blatant or ambiguous prejudice. Participants higher in stigma consciousness were more likely to attribute their failure to prejudice, especially when the situation was ambiguous. Stigma consciousness predicted both other-directed emotions and active coping in response to ambiguous prejudice. Thus, while stigma consciousness has typically been associated with negative outcomes, the present research reveals that it may also have adaptive effects. The implications of these results for being chronically sensitive to stigmatization are discussed.
Investigations of racial bias have emphasized stereotypes and other beliefs as central explanatory mechanisms and as legitimating discrimination. In recent theory and research, emotional prejudices have emerged as another, more direct predictor of discrimination. A new comprehensive meta-analysis of 57 racial attitude-discrimination studies finds a moderate relationship between overall attitudes and discrimination. Emotional prejudices are twices as closely related to racial discrimination as stereotypes and beliefs are. Moreover, emotional prejudices are closely related to both observed and self-reported discrimination, whereas stereotypes and beliefs are related only to self-reported discrimination. Implications for justifying discrimination are discussed.
This research extends the role incongruity analysis of employment-related gender bias by investigating the role of dispositional and situational antecedents, specifically political ideology and the salience of cues to the traditional female gender role. The prediction that conservatives would show an anti-female candidate bias and liberals would show a pro-female bias when the traditional female gender role is salient was tested across three experimental studies. In Study 1, 126 participants evaluated a male or a female job applicant with thoughts of the traditional female gender role activated or not. Results showed that when the gender role is salient, political ideology moderates evaluations of the female candidates such that conservatives evaluate her negatively and liberals evaluate her positively. Study 2 (89 participants) replicated this effect and showed that this political ideology-based bias does not occur when the non-traditional female gender role is made salient. Study 2 also demonstrated that the observed effects are not driven by liberals' and conservatives' differing perceptions regarding the female applicant's qualifications for the job. Finally, Study 3 (159 participants) both replicated the political ideology-based evaluation bias for female candidates and demonstrated that this bias is mediated by conservatives' and liberals' attitudes toward the roles of women in society.
Nine studies examined the construct validity of the Need to Belong Scale. The desire for acceptance and belonging correlated with, but was distinct from, variables that involve a desire for social contact, such as extraversion and affiliation motivation. Furthermore, need to belong scores were not related to insecure attachment or unfulfilled needs for acceptance. Need to belong was positively correlated with extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism and with having an identity that is defined in terms of social attributes. Need to belong was associated with emotional reactions to rejection, values involving interpersonal relationships, and subclinical manifestations of certain personality disorders.
The central focus of this research is on the development and testing of a theoretical framework to understand performance and retention of volunteers. The framework is centered on identity theory and includes both general and specific role identity as well as organizational variables. Data were obtained from two samples of volunteers for the American Cancer Society (ACS). Specific role identity as an ACS volunteer is predicted from general role identity and several factors related to perceived experiences in the organization. Specific role identity explains significant amounts of variance in the number of hours worked for ACS and other organizations as well as intent to remain an ACS volunteer. Results also suggest that volunteers may experience conflicts between the demands of their general and specific role identities. Finally, the effects of ACS role identity on volunteer behavior are compared with those of organizational commitment.
This review article posits that the scarcity of women at the upper levels of organizations is a consequence of gender bias in evaluations. It is proposed that gender stereotypes and the expectations they produce about both what women are like (descriptive) and how they should behave (prescriptive) can result in devaluation of their performance, denial of credit to them for their successes, or their penalization for being competent. The processes giving rise to these outcomes are explored, and the procedures that are likely to encourage them are identified. Because of gender bias and the way in which it influences evaluations in work settings, it is argued that being competent does not ensure that a woman will advance to the same organizational level as an equivalently performing man.
Psychological theories of racial bias assume a pervasive motivation to avoid appearing racist, yet researchers know little regarding laypeople's theories about what constitutes racism. By investigating lay theories of White racism across both college and community samples, we seek to develop a more complete understanding of the nature of race-related norms, motivations, and processes of social perception in the contemporary United States. Factor analyses in Studies 1 and 1a indicated three factors underlying the traits laypeople associate with White racism: evaluative, psychological, and demographic. Studies 2 and 2a revealed a three-factor solution for behaviors associated with White racism: discomfort/unfamiliarity, overt racism, and denial of problem. For both traits and behaviors, lay theories varied by participants' race and their race-related attitudes and motivations. Specifically, support emerged for the prediction that lay theories of racism reflect a desire to distance the self from any aspect of the category ‘racist’.
In this study we compare predictions derived from the theory of reasoned action and identity theory regarding intentions to give blood and blood donation behavior over a seven-month period. Using a sample of 658 blood donors stratified by number of donations, we found that the addition of measures of the importance of the blood donor role identity, of social relations connected to blood donation, and of habit significantly improved the prediction of intentions and donation over the levels provided by the Fishbein-Ajzen model. A developmental analysis suggested that the theory of reasoned action was most effective in predicting intentions and donation for first-time donors. Whereas the full augmented model was most applicable to long-term donors. The results were interpreted to mean that athough the Fishbein-Ajzen model may be the most parsimonious model for the prediction of many non-role behavior, it should be augmented with identity-theory variables for the prediction of established role behaviors.
While the interactionist tradition of sociological role theory has been recognized as a promising conceptual framework for linking theories of social structure and social cognition, there remains little empirical research that examines the link between cognitive structure and role behavior. Our study tests the fundamental assumption that commitment to role behavior is associated with the development of a corresponding cognitive structure, through an analysis of a six-week field experiment designed to produce commitment to the role of “recycler.” We propose that intervention program participation resulted in recycler role-identity development, as well as corresponding changes in cognitive structure—i.e., the development of cognitive schemata—linked to the emergence of a new role-based view of self.
Classical economic models assume that people are fully rational and selfish, while experiments often point to different conclusions. A canonical example is the Ultimatum Game: one player proposes a division of a sum of money between herself and a second player, who either accepts or rejects. Based on rational self-interest, responders should accept any nonzero offer and proposers should offer the smallest possible amount. Traditional, deterministic models of evolutionary game theory agree: in the one-shot anonymous Ultimatum Game, natural selection favors low offers and demands. Experiments instead show a preference for fairness: often responders reject low offers and proposers make higher offers than needed to avoid rejection. Here we show that using stochastic evolutionary game theory, where agents make mistakes when judging the payoffs and strategies of others, natural selection favors fairness. Across a range of parameters, the average strategy matches the observed behavior: proposers offer between 30% and 50%, and responders demand between 25% and 40%. Rejecting low offers increases relative payoff in pairwise competition between two strategies and is favored when selection is sufficiently weak. Offering more than you demand increases payoff when many strategies are present simultaneously and is favored when mutation is sufficiently high. We also perform a behavioral experiment and find empirical support for these theoretical findings: uncertainty about the success of others is associated with higher demands and offers; and inconsistency in the behavior of others is associated with higher offers but not predictive of demands. In an uncertain world, fairness finishes first.
Agentic female leaders risk social and economic penalties for behaving counter-stereotypically (i.e., backlash; Rudman, 1998), but what motivates prejudice against female leaders? The status incongruity hypothesis (SIH) proposes that agentic women are penalized for status violations because doing so defends the gender hierarchy. Consistent with this view, Study 1 found that women are proscribed from dominant, high status displays (which are reserved for leaders and men); Studies 2–3 revealed that prejudice against agentic fe-male leaders was mediated by a dominance penalty; and in Study 3, participants' gender system-justifying beliefs moderated backlash effects. Study 4 found that backlash was exacerbated when perceivers were primed with a system threat. Study 5 showed that only female leaders who threatened the status quo suf-fered sabotage. In concert, support for the SIH suggests that backlash functions to preserve male dominance by reinforcing a double standard for power and control.
Role theory concerns one of the most important features of social life, characteristic behavior patterns or roles. It explains roles by presuming that persons are members of social positions and hold expectations for their own behaviors and those of other persons. Its vocabulary and concerns are popular among social scientists and practitioners, and role concepts have generated a lot of research. At least five perspectives may be discriminated in recent work within the field: functional, symbolic interactionist, structural, organizational, and cognitive role theory. Much of role research reflects practical concerns and derived concepts, and research on four such concepts is reviewed: consensus, conformity, role conflict, and role taking. Recent developments suggest both centrifugal and integrative forces within the role field. The former reflect differing perspectival commitments of scholars, confusions and disagreements over use of role concepts, and the fact that role theory is used to analyze various f...
Outlines the essential elements of a role theoretical perspective and explores its potential importance to service performance in people-based service encounters. Drawing on Biddle, and on Solomon et al.’s interpretations, how role theory enhances our marketing exchange understanding by focusing on the interactive features within successful service encounters is demonstrated. Outlines how role management offers a framework to evaluate the degree of interactivity sought in relationship approaches. Role theory, it is argued, can enable organizations to identify role development needs for service personnel within interactive service formats and permits organizations to monitor processual elements of service performance. A managerial framework, which identifies specific role management tasks in client encounters, is developed. This, it is proposed, may operate in two domains, internally within the service process and externally within the service encounter with clients. The contribution of role to the service life cycle, as a factor in service performance, and as a means to encourage customer retention is discussed: its application in different services contexts is briefly outlined.