Gender Differences in Children's Reasoning About and Motivation to Pursue Leadership Roles

Abstract

Investigating how children think about leadership may inform theories of the gender gaps in leadership among adults. In three studies (N = 492 U.S. children ages 5–10 years), we investigated (1) whether children expect those who claim leadership roles within a peer group to elicit social support and cooperation from the group, (2) children’s own interest and self-efficacy in such roles, and (3) the influence of contextual cues (e.g., how leader roles are described) on children’s reasoning about and interest in leadership. We also explored differences based on children’s race/ethnicity. In Study 1, girls expected lower social support for child leaders than boys did. However, in Study 2, we found no evidence that girls are less interested in leadership. In addition, interest in leadership increased with age among White girls but decreased among White boys and girls and boys of color. In Study 3, we tested whether interest in a leader role is boosted (particularly among girls) by describing the role as helpful for the group and by providing gender-balanced peer role models. Regardless of gender, children in the helpful or “communal” (vs. “agentic”) leader condition were more interested in the leader role, anticipated stronger social support and cooperation from others, and reported higher self-efficacy as leaders. The gender composition of role models had little impact. This research underscores the early development of children’s attitudes toward leadership and highlights the potential value in early interventions to nurture children’s leadership ambitions.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Sex Roles
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01428-z
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Gender Differences inChildren’s Reasoning About andMotivation
toPursue Leadership Roles
AndreaC.Vial1 · AndreiCimpian2
Accepted: 25 September 2023
© The Author(s) 2023
Abstract
Investigating how children think about leadership may inform theories of the gender gaps in leadership among adults. In three
studies (N = 492 U.S. children ages 5–10years), we investigated (1) whether children expect those who claim leadership roles
within a peer group to elicit social support and cooperation from the group, (2) children’s own interest and self-efficacy in
such roles, and (3) the influence of contextual cues (e.g., how leader roles are described) on children’s reasoning about and
interest in leadership. We also explored differences based on children’s race/ethnicity. In Study 1, girls expected lower social
support for child leaders than boys did. However, in Study 2, we found no evidence that girls are less interested in leader-
ship. In addition, interest in leadership increased with age among White girls but decreased among White boys and girls
and boys of color. In Study 3, we tested whether interest in a leader role is boosted (particularly among girls) by describing
the role as helpful for the group and by providing gender-balanced peer role models. Regardless of gender, children in the
helpful or “communal” (vs. “agentic”) leader condition were more interested in the leader role, anticipated stronger social
support and cooperation from others, and reported higher self-efficacy as leaders. The gender composition of role models
had little impact. This research underscores the early development of children’s attitudes toward leadership and highlights
the potential value in early interventions to nurture children’s leadership ambitions.
Keywords Leadership· Gender· Race/ethnicity· Children· Communal goals· Role models
Although their numbers have been slowly rising, women
continue to be underrepresented in leadership roles through-
out the world (e.g., Catalyst, 2022; World Economic Forum,
2020). For example, only 30% of board directors and 6% of
Chief Executive Officers at the top U.S. companies are women
(Catalyst, 2022). Women also remain underrepresented in
political leadership, with the global average share of women
in ministerial positions in 2022 at 16.1% (World Economic
Forum, 2020). A confluence of factors may explain these gen-
der gaps, including discrimination (Eagly & Heilman, 2016),
structural inequalities (England etal., 2020), and gender dif-
ferences in leadership ambition (Netchaeva etal., 2022). This
latter factor, which has received relatively less attention than
the others, is the focus of the current investigation. We adopt
a developmental perspective on this phenomenon, seeking to
examine the origins of gender differences in leadership aspi-
rations. Whereas considerable attention has been devoted to
understanding how adults think about leadership—including,
in the case of women, the perceived social costs of behaving in
leader-like ways—the developmental origins of these attitudes
remain underexamined (e.g., Heck etal., 2021). In three stud-
ies, we investigate young children’s interest in leader roles and
their beliefs about the social rewards and costs of leadership,
with particular attention to potential gender differences.
Gender Gaps inLeadership Ambition
Overall, adult women appear less interested than men in
a wide range of leadership roles (Netchaeva etal., 2022).
For example, Sheppard (2018) found that undergraduate
women were less interested than men in elite leadership
positions and had fewer positive associations with those
* Andrea C. Vial
andrea.vial@nyu.edu
1 Psychology Program, Division ofScience, New York
University Abu Dhabi, Saadiyat Marina District, AbuDhabi,
UnitedArabEmirates
2 Department ofPsychology, New York University, NewYork,
USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
roles. Similarly, Schneider etal. (2016) found that women
expressed less interest in running for political office (see
also Pate & Fox, 2018). More generally, research has docu-
mented gender gaps in the desirability of social power—the
authority to control and allocate resources, make decisions,
and influence one’s own and others’ outcomes—which is
inherent in most leadership roles (Magee & Frasier, 2014).
For instance, women find power less appealing than men and
are less motivated to obtain it (Schuh etal., 2014).
Two related processes have been proposed to jointly
explain these gender gaps in interest in leadership. The first
one involves gender differences in the anticipation (and the
actual experience) of social support and cooperation from
other people. According to lack of fit theory (Heilman, 1983,
2001) and role congruity theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002),
the perceived lack of fit, or the incongruity, between the
traditional female role (which prescribes communality—e.g.,
being sensitive and considerate to others’ needs) and leader-
like attributes (which entail agency—e.g., being dominant
and assertive) limits women’s opportunities. Specifically,
women must work harder than men to be considered
effective leaders and encounter disapproval when they
enact dominant behaviors entailed in leader roles (Williams
& Tiedens, 2016). Female leaders are often disliked by
others (e.g., Heilman & Okimoto, 2007) and undermined
by subordinates—especially men (Netchaeva etal., 2015;
Vial etal., 2018). In the context of politics, Fox and Lawless
(2010) found a remarkable lack of support for women to run
for office (see also Bauer etal., 2022; Okimoto & Brescoll,
2010). The anticipation of a lack of support or disapproval
from others can be a powerful disincentive (Rudman &
Fairchild, 2004; Tomasello, 2014). A lack of social support
is particularly discouraging for would-be leaders, who must
garner support from others or risk having their authority
questioned (e.g., Levi etal., 2009). Accordingly, women’s
anticipation of resistance from others may dissuade them
from behaving assertively (Moss-Racusin & Rudman,
2010), and may generally reduce their sense of self-efficacy
as leaders and their interest in leadership (Fox & Lawless,
2011; Schneider etal., 2016; Sheppard, 2018). For example,
Fisk and Overton (2019) found that women anticipated
harsher sanctions than men for failing as leaders, which in
turn predicted women’s lower interest in a leader role.
A second, related reason that may jointly explain adult
gender gaps in leadership ambition is articulated by goal
congruity theory, which posits that individuals are motivated
to align their behavior with the demands of their social roles,
including those dictated by their gender (Diekman & Eagly,
2008). People are drawn to gender-congruent roles, whereas
gender-incongruent roles are disfavored, partly because ful-
filling gender-role congruent goals can be psychologically
rewarding by itself (Witt & Wood, 2010), and partly because
of a desire to avoid the potential disapproval of engaging
in gender-incongruent behavior (e.g., Tomasello, 2014).
Thus, the interests and preferences of women and men tend
to diverge in ways that are consistent with gender role-
congruent goals (Brown & Diekman, 2010; Diekman etal.,
2010). From a young age, girls more so than boys are social-
ized to endorse and exhibit communal attributes (Chaplin
etal., 2005; Hibbard & Buhrmester, 1998), and adult women
consistently report more communal, other-oriented goals
than men (Hsu etal., 2021; Witt & Wood, 2010). In con-
trast, men tend to espouse more agentic, self-oriented goals
(Evans & Diekman, 2009). Given that leadership is associ-
ated with traits such as dominance and power (Koenig etal.,
2011), leader roles afford men the opportunity to fulfill their
gender-stereotypic (agentic) goals. This is not the case for
women; indeed, leadership may be perceived to clash with
stereotypically-feminine (communal) goals. Even though
scholars recognize the value of communality in leaders
(Gerzema & D’Antonio, 2017), agency-related traits and
behaviors continue to be seen as the hallmark of leadership,
whereas communality is viewed as desirable, yet peripheral,
in leaders (e.g., Koenig etal., 2011; Vial & Napier, 2018).
Thus, the perceived incongruence between leader roles and
the traditional female role may reduce women’s interest in
leadership (Schneider etal., 2016).
In the current studies, we investigate the developmen-
tal roots of the well-documented gender gaps in leadership
ambition (Netchaeva etal., 2022). Understanding how chil-
dren think of leadership could provide important insights
to address the origins of these gender gaps. Drawing from
lack of fit and role congruity theories (Eagly & Karau,
2002; Heilman, 1983, 2001), we expect that children would
anticipate negative reactions to girls who display a will to
lead in interpersonal interactions. Moreover, drawing from
goal congruity theory (Diekman & Eagly, 2008), given that
girls are socialized into peer norms that tend to discourage
leader-like behaviors (Hibbard & Buhrmester, 1998; Martin
& Fabes, 2021; Sebanc etal., 2003), we expect that girls
may anticipate negative reactions to anyone who displays
this kind of behavior. The prospect of lack of support may
in turn reduce girls’ interest in leadership. Many girls may
instead develop other interests that are more congruent with
the traditional female role—that is, roles that clearly afford
communal goals. Over time, girls’ avoidance of leader-like
roles and behaviors could result in a gender gap in leader-
ship ambition among adults. We shed light on these pos-
sibilities by investigating children’s anticipation of social
support for leaders, children’s own interest and self-efficacy
in leader roles, and the influence of contextual cues (specifi-
cally, communal goal affordances and role models) on these
cognitive and motivational variables. We also explore dif-
ferences based on children’s racial/ethnic background. The
potential utility of adopting a developmental lens to under-
stand gender inequality in leadership has been recognized
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
before (Caleo & Halim, 2021; Diekman etal., 2021; Heck
etal., 2021; Martin & Fabes, 2021). Yet, little research has
been devoted to understanding young children’s leadership
cognitions with relation to gender.
Children’s Beliefs About Leadership
There is a growing literature devoted to understanding children’s
generic concepts of leadership and related constructs such as
power and status. This research has shown, for example, that
infants expect leaders (but not non-leaders) to rectify a fairness
transgression within the group (Stavans & Baillargeon, 2019).
Children between 3 and 4 years of age associate having authority
with dictating rules (Zhao & Kushnir, 2018), with non-verbal
cues such as expansive body postures (Terrizzi etal., 2019), and
with making and imposing decisions on others (Charafeddine
etal., 2015). Children of this age already seem able to recognize
not only “malevolent” power but also benevolent power (i.e., a
more communal kind of authority) (Gülgöz & Gelman, 2017).
Gülgöz and Gelman (2017) found that, by age 5, children con-
ceived of social power in a similarly multifaceted way as adults,
encompassing dimensions such as controlling resources, achiev-
ing goals, granting permission, setting norms, and giving orders.
In sum, children’s concepts of power and leadership resemble
those of adults from an early age.
Do Children See Leadership asStereotypically Masculine?
Given that children endorse general gender stereotypes of
agency and communality already by 5years of age (Banse
etal., 2010), it seems reasonable to expect that they would
similarly endorse gender stereotypes of leadership. After all,
children encounter stereotypes equating power with men in
media and other cultural artifacts with high frequency (e.g.,
in animated children’s films; Aley & Hahn, 2020). And yet,
whereas adults clearly view leadership as male-typed (e.g.,
Koenig etal., 2011; Vial & Napier, 2018), children’s beliefs
are not so clear-cut, raising the possibility that leadership
interest might be more similar among boys and girls than
among adult men and women.
Some research suggests that even very young children
expect leaders to possess stereotypically-masculine (rather
than -feminine) attributes. For example, Terrizzi etal. (2019)
found that 3-year-old children associated masculine facial
features with interpersonal authority. Moreover, like adults,
children as young as 5 and 6 years of age seem to associate
men and boys (rather than women or girls) with high-status,
high-power, or high-authority roles (e.g., Bigler etal., 2008;
Charafeddine etal., 2020; Gülgöz, 2015; Liben etal., 2001;
Mandalaywala etal., 2020; Neff etal., 2007). For example,
Bos etal. (2022) found that 6- to 12-year-old children were
more likely to draw a man (vs. a woman) when asked to
draw a political leader, a tendency that grew among girls
as they aged.
In contrast, other research suggests that children’s lead-
ership cognitions are less decisively masculine, and may
incorporate communal attributes to some extent. To illus-
trate, Patterson etal. (2019) found that children between
the ages of 5 and 11 rated stereotypically-feminine qualities
(e.g., “being gentle”) as more important for being president
than stereotypically-masculine qualities (e.g., “being com-
petitive”). Relatedly, Bos etal. (2022) found that younger
children used stereotypically-masculine and -feminine
traits with the same frequency to describe political leaders,
whereas older children used stereotypically-masculine (vs.
-feminine) traits more often. Researchers have also found
that children can be sensitive to the communal obligations
inherent in some leadership roles, expecting leaders to con-
tribute more than non-leaders to joint projects (Stavans &
Diesendruck, 2021) and to refrain from abusing their power
over others (Reyes-Jaquez & Koenig, 2021).
Similarly, past investigations showed that children may
associate gender with some dimensions of social power but
not with others. Specifically, Gülgöz (2015) found that 3-
to 9-year-old children associated boys with the authority to
control resources and grant permissions, but they had no
systematic gender associations when power was operation-
alized as the authority to give orders or set norms. It is also
possible that children are more consistently biased toward
the gender ingroup (rather than male targets) when attrib-
uting power or assigning high-power roles. For instance,
Ayman-Nolley and Ayman (2005) observed own-gender
biases among elementary school-aged children asked to
draw a leader. Reyes-Jaquez and Koenig (2022) similarly
found own-gender biases in 6- to 10-year-old children asked
to select an adult leader.
These mixed findings indicate that children’s beliefs
about gender, gender-stereotypical attributes (agency and
communality), and leadership are less clear-cut than adults’
beliefs. Thus, it remains an empirical question whether the
gender gaps in leadership interest that have been found in
adults would also emerge among young children, or whether
young girls may instead be as interested in leader roles as
young boys.
Are Girls Less Interested inLeadership Than Boys?
A gender gap in interest in leadership (Netchaeva etal., 2022)
seems to be already in place in adolescence. For example, Fox
and Lawless (2014) identified large gender gaps in political
leadership ambitions in a nationally representative sample of
U.S. adolescents. However, evidence for gender gaps in lead-
ership interest in younger children is more mixed: Whereas
Bos etal. (2022) found that 6- to 12-year-old girls expressed
lower levels of political ambition than boys, neither Bigler
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
etal. (2008) nor Patterson etal. (2019) found gender differ-
ences in this age range in children’s interest in being president.
Similarly, outside the context of politics, Reyes-Jaquez and
Koenig (2022) found no gender gap in this age range in chil-
dren’s interest in being in charge of controlling resources (i.e.,
allocating candy) in a group setting. Given the inconsistent
findings about children’s beliefs about gender and leadership
and about children’s own leadership aspirations, more research
is necessary to understand whether young girls are less inter-
ested overall in leader roles compared to boys—and if so, why.
The Current Investigation
We conducted three studies to investigate children’s gen-
dered beliefs about and interest in leadership. These studies
build on each other to examine children’s (1) anticipation
of social support for and cooperation with leaders (Studies
1–3), (2) their own interest in leadership roles (Studies 2
and 3), (3) their anticipated self-efficacy as leaders (Stud-
ies 2 and 3), and (4) whether these beliefs and motivations
are sensitive to contextual features that mark the leader-
ship role as more (or less) communal and gender neutral
(Study 3). Additionally, we explored (5) differences across
age and race/ethnicity in children’s leadership cognitions
and motivation to lead (Studies 1–3). Although all three
studies investigate gender differences in beliefs about and
interest in leadership, Study 1 focused on children’s per-
ceptions of other leaders, whereas Studies 2 and 3 focused
on children’s perceptions of themselves as leaders. Each
study adopts a different vantage point on the phenomenon
of interest, providing a nuanced portrait of children’s gen-
dered leadership cognitions. Importantly, whereas most
studies have examined children’s attitudes about adult
leaders (e.g., Ayman-Nolley & Ayman, 2005; Bigler etal.,
2008; Bos etal., 2022; Neff etal., 2007; Patterson etal.,
2019; Terrizzi etal., 2019), our research adds to a growing
literature focused on children’s attitudes about peer leaders
(Charafeddine etal., 2020; Gülgöz, 2015; Mandalaywala
etal., 2020; Reyes-Jaquez & Koenig, 2022). These peer
contexts may be especially relevant to understanding the
development of gender gaps in leadership ambition, as boys
and girls may be socialized into peer norms that differ in
their emphasis on and encouragement of leader-like behav-
iors (e.g., Martin & Fabes, 2021).
(1) Perceptions oftheSocial Rewards andCosts
ofLeadership
First, we investigated how children think about the social
rewards and costs of leadership—namely, how much peer
support and cooperation they expect were they (or another
child) to take on a leadership role (Studies 1–3). The focus
on these cognitions is motivated by the key role of perceived
social support and cooperation from others in explaining
adult women’s interest in leadership and enactment of leader-
like behaviors (e.g., Brescoll, 2011). Importantly, even 3- to
4-year-old children actively seek to manage what others think
about them (Asaba & Gweon, 2022) and are highly sensi-
tive to the possibility of social disapproval (e.g., Tomasello,
2014). Social sanctions for not following peer gender norms
are particularly salient to children from a young age (Hibbard
& Buhrmester, 1998; Martin & Ruble, 2010). In the context
of leadership and gender, one study showed that preschool
girls were more accepting of low-status (i.e., low-ranked)
girls than of high-status girls, whereas the reversed pat-
tern was observed among boys (Sebanc etal., 2003). These
gendered patterns of peer support as a function of social
rank may lead girls more so than boys to generally expect
children who behave in dominant leader-like ways to incur
social backlash and may also discourage girls from enact-
ing these assertive behaviors themselves (Martin & Fabes,
2021). However, children’s expectations of social support for
or cooperation with leaders have only been examined in the
context of politics (e.g., Bigler etal., 2008; Patterson etal.,
2019), and it remains unknown how children think about
the social costs and rewards of leadership in peer contexts.
We addressed this gap by investigating how much children
expected that others would support and cooperate with girl
and boy leaders in a group activity (Study 1) and how much
support and cooperation they expected for themselves were
they to become the leader (Studies 2 and 3).
(2) Interest inLeader Roles
Second, we investigated gender differences in children’s
interest in a leader role (Studies 2 and 3). Past studies found
gender gaps in children’s interest in political leadership (e.g.,
becoming president one day; Bos etal., 2022). However,
there are distinctive features of politics that do not apply to
leadership roles more generally. For instance, as discussed
by Dolan and Lawless (2021), perceptions of political lead-
ers tend to be negative—an attitude that may not general-
ize to other kinds of leaders. Moreover, whereas political
leadership may be relatively removed from children’s eve-
ryday lives, children may have direct experience with leader
roles in some capacity (e.g., organizing play or activities
with other children) and may be regularly exposed to adults
in leader roles outside the realm of politics (e.g., obeying
authorities such as teachers and parents). For these reasons,
it is important to investigate children’s perceptions of leader-
ship and possible gender gaps in interest in leader roles in
age-appropriate contexts.
To our knowledge, the only study that investigated gender
differences in interest in a more general leader role that was
potentially relevant to children’s lives (i.e., being in control
of allocating candy) did not find a gender gap (Reyes-Jaquez
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
& Koenig, 2022), raising the possibility that leadership
interest does not differ by gender at an early age. However,
in that study, the leader role was embedded in a dyadic situ-
ation involving an adult, and it remains unknown how chil-
dren think of leadership in peer group contexts, where the
pressures and incentives to conform to gender-group norms
may be stronger (e.g., Martin & Fabes, 2021).
In the current research, we build on these past studies
and extend their scope by investigating children’s interest
in leader roles that were embedded in a variety of peer-
group activities (e.g., building a sandcastle, playing a group
game)—a naturalistic context for leadership behavior in
childhood. Although communality is important for leaders
(e.g., Gerzema & D’Antonio, 2017), our studies emphasized
the high-agency aspects of leadership, which are viewed as
core or defining characteristics of leaders (Koenig etal.,
2011; Vial & Napier, 2018), and which overlap particularly
strongly with stereotypically-male traits while being at odds
with the traditional female role (Eagly etal., 2020). Specifi-
cally, whereas leadership roles can be attained in multiple
ways (e.g., by democratic vote), we focused on children’s
attitudes toward leader roles that were claimed assertively
(e.g., announcing, “I will be in charge!”) because this is the
context in which we would expect gender norms to be most
influential—for example, girls in particular may anticipate
low levels of peer support for leaders in these types of con-
texts, whereas boys may be generally more receptive to the
kinds of dominance displays associated with taking on a
leader role (e.g., Hibbard & Buhrmester, 1998).
(3) Self‑Efficacy inLeader Roles
Third, in addition to children’s anticipated support for lead-
ers and their own interest in a leader role, we also examined
their self-efficacy as leaders—that is, their confidence in
and expectations about how well they would perform as
leaders (Studies 2 and 3). Self-efficacy is a pillar of motiva-
tion (Bandura, 1977; Eccles & Wigfield, 2020; Wigfield
& Eccles, 2000) that partly explains adult gender gaps in
leadership ambition (Fox & Lawless, 2011; Schneider etal.,
2016; Sheppard, 2018). Self-efficacy is shaped by, among
other factors, the expectation of support from others. In the
context of leadership in particular, a leader’s capacity to
lead effectively requires cooperation from followers (Levi
etal., 2009; Tyler, 2002). If girls were generally discouraged
within their peer groups from enacting leader-like behav-
iors, as reviewed earlier, they would be unlikely to develop
confidence in their ability to lead effectively (see Shapiro
etal., 2015). In contrast, boys may be socialized to value
leadership skills more, and boy peer groups may offer more
opportunities to build a sense of self-efficacy in leader-like
roles (Martin & Fabes, 2021). Thus, given that a sense of
self-efficacy about one’s own leadership skills may be an
important precursor to viewing oneself as a leader (e.g.,
Eccles & Wigfield, 2020), we investigated whether gender
differences emerged in children’s leadership self-efficacy.
(4) Sensitivity ofChildren’s Leadership Motivation
toContextual Cues
From an intervention perspective, it would be valuable to
understand the conditions under which leadership is most
appealing to children—and, perhaps, the conditions under
which boys and girls find leadership equally attractive.
Exploring this issue was the fourth goal of our research.
We examined experimentally what promotes or hinders chil-
dren’s motivation to lead (Study 3). Specifically, we investi-
gated whether children’s (and particularly girls’) interest in
leadership may be shaped by two kinds of contextual cues:
(a) framing leadership in more communal ways, and (b) the
presence of girl leaders as peer role models.
Communality asaContextual Cue
Although leadership is usually stereotyped as highly domi-
nant and self-oriented (Koenig etal., 2011), it can also entail
communal and other-oriented components (e.g., serving
one’s community). Regardless of how they are appointed,
leaders can behave in highly prosocial ways toward others,
making decisions that promote the welfare of subordinates
(see Vial & Cowgill, 2022). Indeed, prosocial behaviors are
recognized as key features of effective leaders (e.g., Gartzia
& van Knippenberg, 2016; Gerzema & D’Antonio, 2017).
Consistent with the goal congruity perspective (Diekman &
Eagly, 2008), adult gender gaps in interest in leader roles are
reduced when the communal and other-oriented aspects of
leadership are emphasized (Schneider etal., 2016). Empha-
sizing communal goals afforded by other male-dominated
roles (e.g., science careers) has similarly shown to close gen-
der gaps in interest and to generally boost interest among
both women and men (e.g., Belanger etal., 2020). Given that
gender differences in the endorsement of communal goals
and values are already present at age 6 (Block etal., 2018),
scholars have proposed that framing leadership in communal
terms may encourage girls to want to become leaders (e.g.,
Diekman etal., 2021). However, we are unaware of any stud-
ies that have examined this idea empirically, as we did in the
current research, by manipulating a leader role to be more
(or less) communal.
Role Models asaContextual Cue
The second contextual cue that we examined was the pres-
ence of girl leaders as peer role models. Children are encour-
aged by and imitate the behaviors of their peers, who act
as role models (e.g., Bussey & Bandura, 1999). For these
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
reasons, scholars have proposed that exposing girls to relat-
able female leaders could increase their interest in leader-
ship (e.g., Heck etal., 2021). Indeed, relatable role models
can increase middle-school girls’ interest in other male-
dominated areas (e.g., O’Brien etal., 2017). The presence of
women and girls in leadership roles may counter the stereo-
typic view that leadership is “for men” or “for boys” and sig-
nal that leadership is compatible with the traditional female
role. Consistent with this view, research has found higher
leadership aspirations among young women who had had
extensive exposure to female leaders (i.e., who had attended
female-only colleges; Dasgupta & Asgari, 2004). Similarly,
Goodwin etal. (2020) showed that women were more inter-
ested in joining a leadership group with a higher (vs. lower)
proportion of women. However, it remains an open question
whether the presence of own-gender peers (i.e., other girls) in
leader roles would increase girls’ own interest in leadership.
We addressed this gap by manipulating perceptions of the
proportion of boys and girls in leader roles.
(5) Age andRace/Ethnicity asModerators
ofLeadership Cognitions andMotivation
Research suggests that concepts of social power and leader-
ship may be somewhat tenuous before age 5 (e.g., Gülgöz,
2015); thus, we focused our investigation on children between
the ages of 5 and 10—an age range that is common in other
studies on children’s leadership cognitions in relation to gen-
der (e.g., Bigler etal., 2008; Reyes-Jaquez & Koenig, 2022).
As past investigations have found an increase with age in
children’s tendency to associate leadership with males and
masculinity (e.g., Charafeddine etal., 2020; Mandalaywala
etal., 2020; Neff etal., 2007), we explored the possibility that
any male bias or gender gaps in interest in leadership in our
studies may similarly become accentuated with age. This may
be especially the case among girls, whose internalization of
traditionally female standards and peer norms may strengthen
between 5 and 10 years of age, potentially leading to more
negative attitudes toward leadership over time.
Moreover, we took advantage of the diversity of our
samples in terms of race/ethnicity (39.3% identified as
White, on average, across the three studies) to explore the
possibility that children of color may differ in their attitudes
toward leadership from White children and to examine
whether these patterns might further depend on child gender.
Although our studies were not explicitly designed to take an
intersectional approach, which highlights the uniqueness of
interlocking social identities such as gender and race (e.g.,
Lei & Rhodes, 2021), our findings may serve as a foundation
on which future work can build on. Whereas research has
found that children sometimes associate power and status
with members of dominant (vs. subordinate) racial/ethnic
groups (Bigler etal., 2003, 2008; Liben etal., 2001), to
our knowledge, no studies on gender gaps in interest in
leadership have taken an intersectional perspective, either
with children or with adults (e.g., Netchaeva etal., 2022;
Pate & Fox, 2018; Schneider etal., 2016; Schuh etal.,
2014; Sheppard, 2018). However, some studies suggest that
lack of fit or incongruity perceptions for leadership roles
depend not only on gender but also on race/ethnicity (e.g.,
Galinsky etal., 2013; Livingston etal., 2012; Rosette &
Tost, 2010; Rosette etal., 2016), and the mismatch between
agentic leadership and female stereotypes may be weaker for
women and girls of color relative to White women and girls.
For instance, Black women (compared to White women)
are more likely to be characterized with attributes that align
with dominant agency (e.g., confident, assertive, aggres-
sive, strong, dominant, not subservient) (Ghavami & Peplau,
2013; Rosette etal., 2016). Thus, taking on a leadership
role may constitute less of a proscriptive role violation for
women (and girls) of color relative to White women. If so,
it is possible that gender gaps in interest in leadership may
be less apparent among children of color.
Transparency andOpenness
The three studies, which were not preregistered, were
approved by the institutional review board at New York
University (IRB-FY2016-1163). Across studies, we report
how we determined sample size, all data exclusions, all
manipulations, and all measures. The full materials, raw
data, analytic syntax, and supplementary analyses for the
three studies are available on the Open Science Framework
(OSF): https:// osf. io/ h684j/.
Study 1
In Study 1, we examined children’s anticipation of social
support for children who claim a leader role in the context
of a group activity. Given that girls’ peer groups tend to
discourage assertive and dominant behaviors (e.g., Sebanc
etal., 2003), we expected that girls may anticipate negative
reactions to anyone who displays this kind of behavior,
consistent with goal congruity theory (Diekman & Eagly,
2008). Moreover, drawing from lack of fit and role con-
gruity theories (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Heilman, 1983,
2001), we also tested the possibility that children might
be biased against girl leaders, as adults have been found
to be biased against women leaders (e.g., Brescoll, 2011;
Heilman & Okimoto, 2007). That is, we also examined
whether children anticipated less social support for girl
(vs. boy) leaders.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Method
Participants
Participants were 99 children in a large city in the
Northeastern U.S. between the ages of 5 and 10years
(50 boys, 49 girls; M = 7.84years, SD = 1.71years,
range = 4.59–10.54years), who participated in the study
at their schools (n = 37), in children’s museums (n = 52),
or in a university laboratory (n = 10). We sampled children
systematically by age, taking care to include similar num-
bers of boys and girls in three age “bins”: 5–6, 7–8, and
9–10years. Children were 34.3% White, 15.2% Hispanic
or Latinx, 11.1% Asian or Pacific Islander, 3.0% Black,
18.2% Multiracial or Multiethnic, and 6.1% Other; 12.1%
of parents did not report their child’s race/ethnicity. The
sample size for each age group by child gender and race/
ethnicity is reported in TableS1 in the Supplement on
https:// osf. io/ h684j/.
The total sample size was determined a priori based
on several considerations such as (a) ensuring balance
by leader gender and participant gender within each age
group and (b) counterbalancing story order, group size,
and gender composition of the peer groups described in
the stimuli (see Procedure and Measures). A sensitivity
analysis conducted with G*Power (Faul etal., 2007) indi-
cated that n = 99 was sufficient to detect medium-sized
differences (Cohen’s d = 0.56) by participant gender (male;
female) and leader gender (boy; girl) on a two-tailed
independent-samples t-test, assuming power = 80% and
alpha = .05. Although, as detailed in the Analytic Strategy,
our actual analyses in Study 1 consisted of mixed-effects
models, we report a sensitivity analysis based on a t test
both because (1) it is likely conservative—mixed-effects
models are generally more powerful because they take
advantage of more of the data than t tests—and because
(2) sensitivity analyses for mixed-effects models are (still)
dauntingly complex to perform.
Procedure andMeasures
We presented each child with four stories set in four
different contexts (at the beach, at school, at summer
camp, or at the park) in counterbalanced order. Each story
described a group of children engaging in an activity
together (e.g., building a sandcastle) and a child within
the group who claimed a leader role (i.e., “the leader”)
by announcing, “I will be in charge of [activity]; I will
make decisions and tell everyone else what to do.” Thus,
across stories, leaders claimed their role in a highly
assertive manner that was at odds with the traditional
female role (Eagly etal., 2020). The gender of the leader
varied between participants: For half of them, the leader
in each of the four stories was male, whereas for the other
half, the leader in each of the four stories was female. The
full script for each story is available in the Supplement
on https:// osf. io/ h684j/ (p. 3). Images of all leaders and
other visuals are also available on https:// osf. io/ h684j/.
We pre-tested these materials by asking a sample of adults
(n = 52) on Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) to rate each
leader on perceived age, intelligence, warmth, and physical
attractiveness. These judgements were unrelated to children’s
responses in Study 1 (see Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/,
TableS4). Each story featured a different group of children,
counterbalanced within-subjects along two dimensions (a)
size (2 vs. 10 children in addition to the leader) and (b)
gender composition (same gender as the leader vs. mixed
gender). These factors did not influence the results (see
Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/, TableS2).
After each story, we asked children four questions in
counterbalanced order to gauge their anticipation of social
support for the leader from other children in the story. Here
and in Studies 2 and 3, our measure of anticipated social
support was conceptually similar to adult measures of
“fear of backlash” (e.g., Moss-Racusin & Rudman, 2010);
however, we employed primarily positively-worded items
to facilitate children’s comprehension. Our chosen label
for the measure (“anticipated social support”) reflects this
adaptation. The questions were as follows: (a) “Would they
think he/she is nice, or not?”, (b) “Would they think he/
she is bossy, or not?”, (c) “Would they want to be friends
with him/her, or not?”, and (d) “Would they like him/
her more, or less?” Children responded in two steps: an
initial yes/no response (e.g., “Yes, they would think she’s
nice”), followed by a two-point scale (e.g., “Sort of nice?
Or really nice?”). Responses ranged from 1 (e.g., really
not nice) to 4 (e.g., really nice). After reverse-scoring the
“bossy” item, we averaged answers to the four questions
to form a measure of anticipated social support for leaders
(α = .85); higher numbers indicate stronger anticipation of
social support.
After the four stories, children were told that “it is okay
for any child to step up to be in charge,” and were offered
a small prize (e.g., a sticker). For exploratory purposes, at
the end of the session we also asked a subset of children
(n = 33; 17 boys and 16 girls) to indicate why they believed
the four leaders in the stories said they would be in charge,
and whether they (the participants) would like to be in
charge like the children in the stories. A descriptive sum-
mary of the responses is available in the Supplement on
https:// osf. io/ h684j/ (p. 7 and Tables S5 and S6).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Analytic Strategy
To examine whether participant gender and leader gender
influenced responses to the four stories, we first conducted a
mixed-effects linear regression on anticipated social support
with leader gender condition (0 = male leaders, 1 = female
leaders), participant gender (0 = boys, 1 = girls), participant
age in years (with 2+ decimal precision; continuous), and
their interactions as predictors, including crossed random
intercepts for participant and story setting. We then exam-
ined whether participant race/ethnicity (0 = children of color,
1 = White children) moderated any of the effects by includ-
ing this variable and all interactions in the model (n = 87).
Finally, we evaluated whether the effects of leader gender
condition and/or participant gender varied as a function of
(a) group size and gender composition and (b) leader charac-
teristics. These factors did not change the results appreciably
(see Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/, Tables S2 and S4).
In all models, predictors were mean-centered.
Across Studies 1–3, all analyses were conducted in Stata
16 (StataCorp, 2019). In all studies, we standardized the
dependent variables before including them in the models.
Thus, the coefficients for dichotomous variables can be
interpreted similarly to a Cohen’s d: They represent the frac-
tion of a standard deviation by which the dependent variable
changes in response to a shift from one level of a dichoto-
mous predictor to the other. The mixed-effects models were
computed with the mixed command; follow-up tests on these
models were computed with the margins command. Here
and in subsequent studies, we report observed (rather than
predicted) means.
Results
The analysis revealed a significant main effect of partici-
pant gender, such that girls anticipated lower social sup-
port (M = 1.78, SD = 0.66) than boys (M = 2.08, SD = 0.81),
β = −0.42, SE = 0.16, p = .011 (see Fig.1). The main effect
of leader gender condition was not significant, β = 0.05,
SE = 0.16, p = .75, nor was there a significant two-way
interaction between participant gender and leader gender,
β = 0.64, SE = 0.33, p = .050. The age coefficient was not
significant, β = −0.03, SE = 0.05, p = .53, and there were no
interactions between participant age and the other predic-
tors, all ps > .10.
An additional model that included children’s race/ethnic-
ity revealed no significant difference between White chil-
dren and children of color in terms of the social support they
anticipated for the child leader, β = 0.31, SE = 0.18, p = .093.
However, we did observe an interaction between children’s
race/ethnicity and leader gender, β = 0.75, SE = 0.37,
p = .043, such that White children (n = 48) anticipated
more social support for female (vs. male) leaders, β = 0.61,
SE = 0.29, p = .034, whereas children of color (n = 39) did
not, β = −0.08, SE = 0.22, p = .73. There were no other sig-
nificant interactions between race/ethnicity and leader gen-
der, participant gender, or age on anticipated social support,
all ps ≥ .093 (full results in TableS3 in the Supplement on
https:// osf. io/ h684j/).
Discussion
The results of Study 1 suggest that girls expect child leaders
to receive less social support from peers compared to boys,
regardless of leader gender and context (i.e., the setting of
the activity and the size or gender composition of the group;
see Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/, TableS2). It is pos-
sible that girls in Study 1 expected less social support for
leaders than boys because, across stories, claiming the leader
role represented a highly assertive behavior, which is at odds
with the traditional female role (Eagly etal., 2020). Alterna-
tively, girls may have expected leaders to be less supported
because girls’ peer groups tend to discourage dominant
behaviors, whereas boys view them more favorably (e.g.,
Sebanc etal., 2003). The participant gender difference in
anticipated social support for leaders was not moderated by
children’s age or race/ethnicity, but we did find that White
children expected girl leaders to elicit more social support
than boy leaders, whereas children of color did not differ-
entiate between girl and boy leaders. Although speculative,
it is possible that White children in Study 1 may have been
Fig. 1 Anticipated Social Support for Child Leaders Among Girls
and Boys in Study 1
N
ote. Each box extends from the first to the third quartile of the data [Q1 and Q3, respectively;
the “interquartile rang
e”]. The whiskers extend up to 1.5 × the interquartile range below
Q3 and
above Q1. Within each box plot, the solid line in the middle represents the median and the
diamond represents the mean
.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
more attuned to leader gender differences than children of
color given that the leaders in the stories were all White—a
limitation we return to in the General Discussion. Even so,
it is interesting to note the contrast between the fact that
participating girls expected lower social support for lead-
ers, while the girls in the stories were expected to receive
more support, at least by White children. The latter finding
is discrepant with most of the adult literature on leadership
(Eagly & Heilman, 2016).
If girls expect child leaders to be relatively unsupported
by their peers (compared to boys), then they might be more
reluctant than boys to act as leaders. We examined this pos-
sibility in Study 2, building on Study 1 by again measuring
participating children’s anticipation of social support from
peers, this time in reference to themselves in a leader role.
Study 2
In contrast to Study 1, which focused on children’s per-
ceptions of other leaders, in Study 2 we investigated chil-
dren’s perceptions of themselves as leaders—in particular,
whether girls express less interest than boys in being a
leader, whether they expect lower levels of social support
(similar to Study 1) and cooperation from other children,
and whether they exhibit less self-efficacy regarding their
ability to lead—which, we reasoned, might be connected
to children’s expectation of social support and cooperation
from others (e.g., Tyler, 2002).
Method
Participants
Participants were 149 children in a large city in the
Northeastern U.S. between the ages of 5 and 10years
(77 boys, 72 girls; M = 7.99 years, SD = 1.66 years,
range = 4.86–10.96years), who took part in the study at
their schools (n = 37), in children’s museums (n = 94), or
in a university laboratory (n = 18). The sample size was
determined a priori to ensure balance by participant gen-
der and age. We again sampled children systematically by
age, taking care to include similar numbers of boys and girls
in three age “bins”: 5–6, 7–8, and 9–10years. The sample
size for each age group by child gender and race/ethnicity
is reported in TableS1 in the Supplement on https:// osf. io/
h684j/. We excluded children who answered attention check
questions incorrectly (n = 4; see Procedure). A sensitivity
analysis conducted via simulation (50,000 iterations) with
the paramtest package (Hughes, 2017) in R version 4.2.2 (R
Core Team, 2021) indicated that a sample of 149 children
was sufficient to detect small-to-medium gender differences
in interest in leadership (|β|s ≥ 0.46) with 80% power in a linear
regression structured as described in Analytic Strategy. Children
were 31.5% White, 14.8% Hispanic or Latinx, 8.7% Asian
or Pacific Islander, 6.0% Black, 11.4% Multiracial or Multi-
ethnic, and 6.0% Other; 21.5% of parents did not report their
child’s race/ethnicity.
Procedure
We presented children with a novel game (the “Zarky
Game”) and told them that they would have an opportunity
to play this game in the future with other children of their
age. We described the game as one in which children play
together and, although no leader is necessary, one player
may decide to be in charge. We specified that having a leader
was not mandatory and that claiming the leader role was
entirely optional; thus, as in Study 1, claiming the leader role
in Study 2 constituted a highly assertive behavior at odds
with the traditional female role (Eagly etal., 2020):
In the Zarky Game, children play together, and they
don’t need anyone to be in charge. But sometimes one
of the kids in the game wants to be the Zarky Boss. At
the beginning of the game, all of the kids are sitting
down, see? If a kid stands up and says, ‘I will be the
Zarky Boss,’ then this kid becomes the Zarky Boss.
The Zarky Boss is then in charge of the game, makes
decisions, and tells everyone else what to do. The kids
who stay seated and who do not stand up are the fol-
lowers. They do whatever the Zarky Boss says.
After hearing the description of the game, children were
reminded that they would play the game in the future with
other children their own age and were then asked a series of
questions to measure their interest in the leader role. These
questions were followed by three counterbalanced blocks of
questions that measured children’s expectations if they were
the game leader, including their anticipation of (a) social
support (similar to Study 1) and (b) cooperation from other
children in the game, and (c) their sense of self-efficacy as
game leader. Within each block, question order was coun-
terbalanced. For exploratory purposes, we tested the same
constructs with respect to other children in the leader role (a
boy and a girl). A description of these additional measures
and the results is provided in the Supplement on https:// osf.
io/ h684j/ (pp. 14–17).
At the end of the session, children answered two attention
check questions to confirm their understanding of the leader
role (e.g., “Does the Zarky Boss tell the other kids what to
do? Or does the Zarky Boss do what the other kids say?”).
We excluded children who answered both questions incor-
rectly (n = 4). Finally, children were told that “it is okay for
any child to step up to be in charge” and were offered a small
prize (e.g., a sticker).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Measures
Interest intheLeader Role
First, children were asked, “Would you like to be the Zarky
Boss? Or would you not like to be the Zarky Boss?” After
the child responded, the experimenter followed up by asking
whether they would “sort of” or “really” like/not like to be
the Zarky Boss. These responses were coded on a 4-point
scale (1 = really not like to, 4 = really like to). Next, children
were asked to explain the reasoning behind their decision
(open-ended). We coded these responses for exploratory
purposes; a descriptive summary of the results can be found
on pp. 10–12 and TableS7 in the Supplement on https://
osf. io/ h684j/. Finally, we asked children to choose between
being a follower (coded as 0) and being the Zarky Boss
(coded as 1). We standardized children’s responses to the
first and last questions (r = .70, p < .001) and averaged them
into a single measure. Higher numbers indicate more interest
in being the leader.
Anticipated Social Support
To gauge how much social support children anticipated
receiving as would-be game leaders, we adapted three items
from Study 1 to the game context. The questions began with
the stem, “After you said you would be in charge of the
game, would the other children…”: (a) “like you more? Or
like you less?”; (b) “want to be friends with you? Or not
want to be friends with you?”; and (c) “think you are nice?
Yes? Or no?” Responses were coded on a 4-point scale (e.g.,
1 = like me a lot less, 4 = like me a lot more), and were aver-
aged into a single measure (α = .70); higher numbers indicate
stronger anticipation of social support from other children.
Anticipated Cooperation
Here and in Study 3, our measure of anticipated cooperation
was inspired by the adult literature on leadership, which sug-
gests that subordinate cooperation reflects and shapes the
legitimacy of authority figures and differs based on leader
gender (e.g., Tyler, 2002; Vial etal., 2018; see also Vial
etal., 2016). Three questions gauged how much participants
expected the other children to cooperate with them as would-
be leaders. The questions began with the stem, “After you
said you would be in charge of the game, would the other
children…”: (a) “want to play Zarky more? Or want to play
less?”; (b) “do what you say? Or not do what you say?”;
and (c) “pay attention to you? Or not pay attention to you?”
Responses were coded on a 4-point scale (e.g., 1 = really
not do what I say, 4 = really do what I say), and were aver-
aged into a single measure (α = .75); higher numbers indicate
stronger anticipation of cooperation from other children.
Self‑Efficacy asLeader
Three questions evaluated children’s self-efficacy as a
would-be leader: (a) “How good do you think you’d be as
the Zarky Boss? Would you be good at it? Or would you
not be good at it?”; (b) “How good do you think you’d be at
telling other kids what to do? Would you be good at it? Or
would you not be good at it?”; and (c) “How well would the
other children do at Zarky with you as Zarky boss? Would
they do well? Or not so well?” Responses were coded on a
4-point scale (e.g., 1 = really not well, 4 = really well), and
were averaged into a single measure (α = .63).
Analytic Strategy
For each dependent variable, we first conducted a linear
regression with participant gender (0 = boys, 1 = girls),
participant age in years (with 2 + decimal precision; con-
tinuous), and their interaction as predictors. Then, for each
dependent variable, we examined whether participant race/
ethnicity (0 = children of color, 1 = White children) moder-
ated any of the effects by including this variable and all inter-
actions in the model (n = 117). When appropriate, we used
a Bonferroni-corrected alpha level to account for multiple
comparisons. In all models, predictors were mean-centered.
Results
Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations can be
found in Table1. Anticipated social support and cooperation
from others were positively related to each other, r(146) = .42,
p < .001, and both were positively related with self-efficacy
as a leader (rs ranging from .34 to .44, ps < .001). These three
variables were positively related with interest in the leader
role (rs ranging from .24 to .52, ps < .01).
Interest intheLeader Role
Girls’ interest in the leader position (M = −0.13, SD = 0.98)
did not differ significantly from boys’ interest (M = 0.12,
SD = 1.01), β = −0.24, SE = 0.16, p = .14. The coefficient
for participant age was not significant either, β = −0.07,
SE = 0.05, p = .13, nor was there a significant gender × age
interaction, β = 0.14, SE = 0.10, p = .16.
When participant race/ethnicity was entered into the
model, results revealed a significant three-way interac-
tion with participant gender and age, β = 0.55, SE = 0.23,
p = .018. A sensitivity analysis conducted via simulation
(50,000 iterations) indicated that n = 117 was sufficient to
detect a three-way interaction effect as small as |β|= 0.69
with 80% power in this linear regression model (see https://
osf. io/ h684j/. for R code). Thus, our sample was slightly
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
underpowered to detect the observed interaction. As illus-
trated in Fig.2, which shows interest in the leader role as a
function of age and gender separately for children of color
(Panel A) and White children (Panel B), the three-way
interaction emerged because interest in the leader position
increased with age for White girls, whereas it decreased with
age for all other groups (i.e., White boys, girls of color, and
boys of color). None of the slopes were significant after
adjusting for multiple comparisons, ps > .09.
Anticipated Social Support
The basic model revealed no significant gender difference in
anticipated social support from other children in the game,
β = 0.07, SE = 0.16, p = .67, no significant age differences,
β = −0.07, SE = 0.05, p = .18, and no interaction between
gender and age, β = 0.10, SE = 0.10, p = .33. The model with
participant race/ethnicity revealed no main effect for this
variable, β = 0.15, SE = 0.19, p = .44, and no interactions
with the other predictors, ps > .18.
Anticipated Cooperation
Results revealed no significant gender difference in antici-
pated cooperation from other children in the game, β = −0.07,
SE = 0.16, p = .68, no significant age differences, β = 0.06,
SE = 0.05, p = .24, and no significant interaction between gender
and age, β = 0.02, SE = 0.10, p = .83. Adding participant race/
ethnicity to the model revealed no significant difference between
White children and children of color, β = 0.35, SE = 0.19,
p = .066. No other coefficients were significant, ps > .09.
Table 1 Means, Standard
Deviations, and Bivariate
Correlations in Study 2
COC children of color, WC white children
* p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
M (SD) 1 2 3 4 5
1. Interest in leader role −0.003 (0.92) –
2. Anticipated social support 3.04 (0.68) .25** –
3. Anticipated cooperation 3.15 (0.74) .24** .42*** –
4. Self-efficacy as a leader 3.04 (0.74) .52*** .34*** .44*** –
5. Participant age 7.99 (1.66) −.14 −.12 .09 −.10 –
6. Participant gender
(0 = male, 1 = female)
– −.13 .03 −.03 .01 .03
7. Participant race/ethnicity
(0 = COC, 1 = WC)
– −.03 .05 .16 .09 .11
N
ote. Error bands represent 95% confidence intervals.
Fig. 2 Interest in Leader Role as a Function of Age and Gender Among a Children of Color and b White Children in Study 2
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Self‑Efficacy asLeader
The basic model revealed no significant gender difference in
sense of self-efficacy as leader, β = 0.03, SE = 0.16, p = .87, no
significant age differences, β = −0.06, SE = 0.05, p = .27, and
no interaction between gender and age, β = 0.03, SE = 0.10,
p = .77. Similarly, no coefficients were significant in the
model that included the race/ethnicity variable, ps > .11.
Discussion
The results of Study 2 provide no evidence of gender gaps in
interest in leadership in children and no support for the idea
that leadership interest among girls is particularly low. In fact,
the results suggest a growing interest in leadership among
White girls from ages 5 to 10, and a waning interest among all
other groups (i.e., White boys, girls and boys of color). This
finding indicates that the gender gaps in interest in leadership
found among adults may emerge at a later developmental stage,
presumably in adolescence (Bos etal., 2022; Fox & Lawless,
2014). We return to these possibilities in the General Discus-
sion. Although the results involving children’s racial/ethnic
background should be interpreted with caution given the small
sample sizes for any particular age group × race/ethnicity com-
bination, it is noteworthy that, as shown in Fig.2, the relation-
ship between age and interest in the leader role appears to differ
for White girls compared to White boys but shows no apparent
gender difference in children of color. These results underscore
the value of investigating intersecting identities in the study of
gender gaps in leadership ambition (e.g., Heck etal., 2021).
We found little evidence in the current study for gender gaps
in the anticipation of social support or cooperation from peers
when children imagined themselves in a leader role. This result
is in tension with the findings of Study 1, in which girls expected
less social support than boys for other children in leader roles.
We return to this inconsistency in the General Discussion. Impor-
tantly, in Study 2, we also found little evidence for a gender gap in
children’s sense of self-efficacy, which suggests that any gender
differences in interest in leader roles at this young age may not
be due to girls’ lack of confidence in their leadership abilities.
In our final study, we build on these findings by investi-
gating the possibility that children’s expectations for them-
selves in a leader role (and their interest in it) may be sensi-
tive to contextual cues that mark the leader role as more or
less communal and gender-neutral.
Study 3
The goal of Study 3 was to build on the results of Study
2 to test whether children’s interest in a leader role (par-
ticularly among girls) is sensitive to (a) whether the leader
role is framed in a way that aligns with communality and
(b) whether girls are explicitly represented among lead-
ers (thus serving as peer role models for participating
girls). To accomplish this goal, we used the same proce-
dure as in Study 2, with two important changes. First, we
manipulated the description of the leader role. Drawing
from goal congruity theory (Diekman & Eagly, 2008), we
reasoned that emphasizing the communal aspects of the
leader role might increase children’s interest in that role
and their anticipation of support and cooperation from oth-
ers, and potentially close gender gaps in children’s interest
in leadership. Thus, in one condition, the leader role was
described as communal—specifically, helpful to others. In
the other condition, the leader role was described exactly
as in Study 2—that is, in highly agentic terms. Second, we
manipulated the presence of girl leaders, which allowed
us to test the possibility that exposure to female role
models could increase girls’ interest in leadership (e.g.,
Heck etal., 2021). In one condition, most past leaders
were boys, which we assumed to be closest to children’s
baseline impressions of leadership, given that leadership
stereotypes tend to overlap with male stereotypes (Koenig
etal., 2011), that leaders around the world tend to be men
(World Economic Forum, 2020), and that children see
these patterns reflected in media from an early age (Aley
& Hahn, 2020). In the other condition, an equal number
of past leaders were boys and girls.
We expected children—girls, in particular—to be more
interested in the leader role and to anticipate more sup-
port and cooperation from others when the leader role
was framed in communal (vs. agentic) terms and when
girl leaders were well-represented (vs. a minority). We
expected these two factors to have an additive effect on
children’s responses; we did not expect them to interact.
Method
Participants
Participants were 244 children in a large city in the
Northeastern U.S. between the ages of 5 and 10years
(121 boys, 123 girls; M = 8.01years, SD = 1.64 years,
range = 5.00–11.02years), who participated in the study
at their schools (n = 72), in children’s museums (n = 46),
in a university laboratory (n = 21), or online via Zoom
(n = 105). The sample size was determined a priori based
on several considerations: We sampled children systemati-
cally by age as in Studies 1 and 2 and tried to ensure gen-
der balance within each age group (5–6, 7–8, and 9–10);
we also counterbalanced a number of variables described
in the Procedure section. The sample size for each age
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
group by child gender and race/ethnicity is reported in
TableS1 in the Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/. An
additional 26 children were tested but excluded because
they answered attention check questions incorrectly (see
Procedure). A sensitivity analysis conducted via simula-
tion (50,000 iterations) indicated that a sample of 244 chil-
dren was sufficient to detect effects of the manipulations
on children’s leadership interest as small as |β| = 0.37 with
80% power in a linear regression structured as described
in Analytic Strategy. Children were 52.1% White, 14.8%
Hispanic or Latinx, 8.2% Asian or Pacific Islander, 6.2%
Black, 9.4% Multiracial or Multiethnic, and 0.8% Other;
8.6% of parents did not report their child’s race/ethnicity.
Procedure andMeasures
We presented children with the same novel game from Study
2, using an identical script, but we modified the description
of the game to manipulate (a) the perception of the leader
role as communal or agentic, and (b) the presence of girl
peer leaders as role models (i.e., whether girls were well-
represented or a minority among past leaders). The Appendix
contains the full script used to describe the game. At the end
of the session, children were told that “it is okay for any child
to step up to be in charge” (as in Study 2) and were offered a
small prize (e.g., a sticker).
Agentic vs. Communal Leader Framing Manipulation
We randomly assigned half of the children to an “Agentic
Leader” framing condition in which the description of the
leader role was identical to that in Study 2. The other half of
the children were assigned to a “Communal Leader” framing
condition in which the experimenter emphasized that having
a leader in the game was “very helpful” (see Appendix). We
reasoned that, although claiming the leader role may gener-
ally constitute an assertive behavior, doing so in a context in
which it is explicitly helpful to have a leader (vs. a context
in which helpfulness was not mentioned) would represent a
more communal behavior. To help children encode the infor-
mation about the leader role, the experimenter asked them a
memory check question (Communal Leader condition: “Is it
helpful to have a Zarky Boss? Or is it not helpful?”; Agentic
Leader condition: “Does the Zarky game need a boss? Or
does it not need a boss?”). Regardless of whether the child
responded correctly, the experimenter restated the correct
answer before continuing.
Role Model Manipulation
We manipulated the presence of girl leaders as peer role
models by showing participants a list of children who
had ostensibly played the game the week before and had
claimed the leader role (see Appendix). The list contained
twelve children including their names, ages, and a picture,
with their gender clearly marked by the colors blue (for
boys) and pink (for girls). We randomly assigned half of
the participating children to a “majority male” condition in
which girl leaders were poorly represented (i.e., only 25% of
past leaders were girls). We assumed that this condition was
closest to a baseline condition in which information about
past leaders was not made explicit (e.g., Study 2), given
male stereotypes about leadership (Koenig etal., 2011),
the fact that most leaders in the world are men (World
Economic Forum, 2020), and that children are exposed to
these patterns in media from an early age (e.g., Aley &
Hahn, 2020). The other half of the children were assigned
to a “gender-balanced” condition in which girl and boy
leaders were equally represented. To help children encode
the gender composition of past leaders, the experimenter
asked them to count the number of boys and girls. If the
child answered incorrectly, the experimenter counted aloud
to arrive at the correct response. Next, the experimenter
asked children a memory check question: “Of the kids who
were Zarky Boss last week, were they mostly boys? Or were
they mostly girls? Or about the same number of boys and
girls?” If the child answered incorrectly, the experimenter
produced the list again and counted the boys and girls one
more time before proceeding.
Measures
After describing the game, the experimenter reminded
participating children that they would play the game in
the future with other children their own age and asked the
same questions from Study 2 to measure their interest in
the leader role (r = .72) and their expectations as would-
be game leaders, including their anticipation of (a) social
support (α = .74) and (b) cooperation (α = .69) from other
children, and (c) their sense of self-efficacy as game leaders
(α = .79). We counterbalanced the order of the three blocks
of questions and of the questions within each block. We also
explored children’s expectations for leaders of their own
gender group. A full description of these additional meas-
ures and an analysis of children’s responses is reported in the
Supplement on https:// osf. io/ h684j/ (pp. 18–22).
Next, children answered four questions that gauged
their attentiveness and recall of the key manipulations. The
first two questions were identical to the questions that had
already been asked earlier in the session to help children
retain the information about the manipulations: (a) whether
the leaders of the previous week had been mostly boys,
mostly girls, or about the same number of boys and girls,
and (b) whether or not the game needed a leader (in the
“Agentic Leader” condition) or whether or not it was helpful
to have a leader (in the “Communal Leader” condition). We
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
excluded children who answered either question incorrectly
when asked this second time (n = 15). Lastly, to gauge recall
of what the leader role entailed (i.e., telling other kids what
to do), we asked all children the two attention check ques-
tions from Study 2; we excluded children who answered
both questions incorrectly (n = 11).
Analytic Strategy
We conducted a linear regression model for each dependent
variable with participant gender (0 = boys, 1 = girls),
participant age in years (with 2 + decimal precision;
continuous), leader framing condition (0 = agentic leader,
1 = communal leader), and role model condition (0 = majority
male, 1 = gender-balanced) as predictors (all mean-centered),
and all interactions. Then, as in Studies 1 and 2, we tested the
same models with the addition of participant race/ethnicity
(0 = children of color, 1 = White children) (n = 223) to
examine if this variable moderated any of the effects. When
appropriate, we use a Bonferroni-corrected alpha level to
account for multiple comparisons.
Results
Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations can
be found in Table2. As in Study 2, anticipated social sup-
port and cooperation from others in Study 3 were positively
related to each other, r(242) = .62, p < .001, and both were
positively related with self-efficacy as a leader (rs ranging
from .47 to .48, ps < .001). These three variables were posi-
tively related with interest in the leader role (rs ranging from
.18 to .52, ps < .01).
Interest intheLeader Role
Interest in the leader role did not differ significantly
between girls (M = 0.09, SD = 0.98) and boys (M = −0.09,
SD = 1.01), β = 0.17, SE = 0.13, p = .18. Children were sig-
nificantly more interested in the leader role in the commu-
nal leader framing condition (M = 0.20, SD = 0.95) com-
pared to the agentic leader framing condition (M = −0.19,
SD = 1.01), β = 0.38, SE = 0.13, p = .003 (see Fig.3). The
two-way interaction between participant gender and leader
framing condition was not significant, β = −0.07, SE = 0.25,
p = .77. Surprisingly, children expressed significantly more
interest in the leader role in the majority-male role model
condition (M = 0.15, SD = 0.99) compared to the gender-
balanced role model condition (M = −0.13, SD = 1.00),
β = −0.28, SE = 0.13, p = .031; this effect did not inter-
act with participant gender, β = 0.04, SE = 0.25, p = .89.
The coefficient for participant age was not significant,
β = −0.02, SE = 0.04, p = .52, nor were there any other sig-
nificant coefficients in the model, ps > .21.
Adding participant race/ethnicity to the model revealed
no main effect of this variable, β = −0.02, SE = 0.15, p = .91.
However, there was a significant three-way interaction with
participant gender and leader framing condition, β = 1.30,
SE = 0.59, p = .028. A sensitivity analysis conducted via
simulation (50,000 iterations) indicated that a sample of
223 children was sufficient to detect a three-way interaction
effect as small as |β|= 1.68 with 80% power in this linear
regression model (see https:// osf. io/ h684j/. for R code).
Thus, our sample was slightly underpowered to detect
the observed interaction. As seen in Fig.4, which shows
interest in the leader role as a function of leader framing
condition and gender separately for children of color (Panel
A) and White children (Panel B), the effect of leader framing
condition was particularly strong among boys of color, who
reported significantly more interest in the leader role in the
communal (vs. agentic) leader framing condition, β = 0.91,
SE = 0.35, p = .037 (Bonferroni-corrected). For all other
groups (i.e., girls of color, White boys, and White girls), the
effect of leader framing condition was not significant after
adjusting for multiple comparisons, ps > .14. Participant
race/ethnicity did not moderate any other effects, ps > .11.
Table 2 Means, Standard
Deviations, and Bivariate
Correlations in Study 3
COC children of color, WC white children
* p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
M (SD) 1 2 3 4 5
1. Interest in leader role −0.001 (0.93) –
2. Anticipated social support 3.08 (0.69) .26*** –
3. Anticipated cooperation 3.25 (0.68) .18** .62*** –
4. Self-efficacy as a leader 3.15 (0.76) .52*** .48*** .46*** –
5. Participant age 8.01 (1.64) −.03 −.19** −.05 .02 –
6. Participant gender
(0 = male, 1 = female)
– .09 .13*.14*.12 −.02
7. Participant race/ethnicity
(0 = COC, 1 = WC)
– −.04 −.02 −.03 −.01 −.08
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Anticipated Social Support
Girls anticipated significantly more social support (M = 3.17,
SD = 0.67) than boys (M = 2.99, SD = 0.71), β = 0.25,
SE = 0.12, p = .041. Age was negatively associated with
anticipated social support, β = −0.11, SE = 0.04, p = .003. As
with interest in the leader role, there was a significant effect
of leader framing condition, β = 0.42, SE = 0.12, p = .001,
such that children anticipated more social support in the
communal leader condition (M = 3.22, SD = 0.60) compared
to the agentic leader condition (M = 2.94, SD = 0.75). No
other coefficients were significant, ps > .08.
Results were similar when we included participant race/eth-
nicity in the regression model. The main effect of this variable
was not significant, β = 0.01, SE = 0.14, p = .92, and race/ethnicity
did not interact significantly with any other predictors, ps > .13.
Fig. 3 Interest in Leader Role as a Function of Participant Gender and a Leader Framing Condition and b Role Model Condition in Study 3
Fig. 4 Interest in Leader Role as a Function of Leader Framing Condition and Participant Gender Among a Children of Color and b White
Children in Study 3
Note. Positive scores indicate higher interest; negative scores indicate lower interest. Each box extends from the first to the
third quartile of the data [Q1 and Q3, respectively; the “interquartile range”]. The whiskers extend up to 1.5 × the
interquartile range below Q3 and above Q1. Within each box plot, the solid line represents the median and the diamond
represents the mean.
N
ote. Positive scores indicate higher interest; negative scores indicate lower interest. Each box extends from the first to the
third quartile of the data [Q1 and Q3, respectively
; the “interquartile range”]. The whiskers extend up to 1.5 × the
interquartile range below Q3 and above Q1. Within each box plot, the solid
line represents the median and the diamond
repres
ents the mean. The two-way interactions between participant gender and each of the two experimental conditions
were not significant.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Anticipated Cooperation
Similar to the results for anticipated social support, girls
anticipated significantly more cooperation from other chil-
dren (M = 3.34, SD = 0.63) than boys (M = 3.16, SD = 0.72),
β = 0.27, SE = 0.13, p = .033. Additionally, children antici-
pated significantly more cooperation in the communal leader
condition (M = 3.43, SD = 0.53) compared to the agentic
leader condition (M = 3.08, SE = 0.75), β = 0.52, SE = 0.13,
p < .001. No other coefficients were significant, ps > .34.
Results revealed a non-significant main effect of partici-
pant race/ethnicity when this variable was included in the
model, β = −0.002, SE = 0.15, p = .99. Race/ethnicity did not
interact significantly with any other predictors, ps > .059.
Self‑Efficacy asLeader
Children’s self-efficacy was significantly higher in the com-
munal leader condition (M = 3.29, SD = 0.67) compared to
the agentic leader condition (M = 3.01, SD = 0.82), β = 0.37,
SE = 0.13, p = .004. No other coefficients were significant,
ps ≥ .066.
Adding participant race/ethnicity to the model revealed
a non-significant main effect of this variable, β = 0.07,
SE = 0.15, p = .64. However, there was a significant race/
ethnicity × leader framing condition interaction, β = −0.59,
SE = 0.30, p = .048. Framing the leader role as communal
had a substantial positive effect on self-efficacy among
children of color (n = 127, 67 boys and 60 girls), β = 0.77,
SE = 0.23, p = .001, but not among White children (n = 96,
44 boys and 52 girls), β = 0.17, SE = 0.18, p = .37. There
were no other significant interactions with participant race/
ethnicity, ps > .12.
Discussion
The results of Study 3 showed that interest in a leader role
was stronger when this role was more compatible with
communality—a pattern that emerged for all children,
not only girls, similar to past findings among adults (e.g.,
Belanger etal., 2020). The leader framing manipulation had
reliable effects across dependent variables, such that children
were more interested in the leader role in the communal leader
condition compared to the agentic leader condition (which
resembled the leader role in Study 2), and they anticipated
stronger social support and cooperation as would-be leaders,
as well as higher self-efficacy. As a whole, these findings
suggest that many children, regardless of gender, may benefit
from learning about the communal aspects of leadership.
As in Study 2, some of these positive effects interacted in
nuanced ways with participant demographics. Specifically,
framing the leader role as communal had a much stronger
effect on interest in leadership among boys of color than
among girls of color or White children. Moreover, children
of color (regardless of gender) anticipated significantly
higher self-efficacy as leaders when the leader role was
framed as communal, whereas this manipulation did not
increase self-efficacy for White children. Although these
patterns should be interpreted with caution given the small
sample sizes for any particular gender × race/ethnicity com-
bination, they again highlight the relevance of intersectional
perspectives for a comprehensive understanding of leader-
ship cognitions, not only in adults (e.g., Rosette etal., 2016)
but also in children (Heck etal., 2021; Lei & Rhodes, 2021).
It is also worth noting that, as in Study 2, we did not find
a gender gap in interest in leadership in Study 3, regardless
of leader framing condition. These findings suggest that,
if gender gaps in interest in leadership exist among 5- to
10-year-old children, they may be less robust than adult
gender gaps.
Although we have focused on the positive effects of fram-
ing leadership in communal terms, the patterns we observed
could conceivably be due to the detrimental effects of fram-
ing leadership in exclusively agentic terms. Given that the
latter framing is closer to adults’ view of leadership (e.g.,
Koenig etal., 2011), we conceptualized the agentic leader
framing condition as a baseline. However, given mixed find-
ings on children’s cognitions about gender and leadership
(Bos etal., 2022), it seems possible that children in Study 3
might have reacted negatively to the agentic framing condi-
tion instead of (or in addition to) reacting positively to the
communal framing condition.
The role model manipulation had no impact on children’s
anticipation of social support or cooperation from others
or on their self-efficacy as leaders. Surprisingly, children
were overall less interested in the leader role when previ-
ous leaders were gender-balanced (vs. mostly male). It is
possible that a variety of beliefs about the leader role—or
the game in which it was embedded—may have shifted as a
function of this manipulation (e.g., the perceived status of
the leader role, inferences about the level of physical activ-
ity involved in the game, expectations of how fun the game
might be), in ways that influenced interest in the leader role
in the opposite direction than we had expected. We return to
this possibility in the General Discussion.
Older children in Study 3 anticipated lower social sup-
port than younger children, even though age was not associ-
ated with self-efficacy or interest in the leader role. We also
found some gender differences that emerged regardless of
how the leader role was framed and regardless of the pres-
ence of girl peer role models. Namely, girls anticipated more
social support and stronger cooperation from other children
than boys across conditions. Like the results of Study 2,
these results are in contrast with those of Study 1, in which
girls’ expectations for other children in a leader role were
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
less positive than boys’ expectations. We speculate about
these discrepancies in the General Discussion.
General Discussion
Whereas considerable attention has been devoted to under-
standing how adults think about leadership, the develop-
mental origins of these attitudes remain underexamined.
Adopting a developmental perspective has the potential to
increase current knowledge about the roots of gender ine-
quality in leadership positions (e.g., Heck etal., 2021). With
this goal in mind, we conducted three studies to investigate
children’s beliefs about leadership and gender. Although
these studies explored this phenomenon from different
perspectives (e.g., first vs. third person), they nevertheless
complemented each other and provided a comprehensive
examination of children’s gendered leadership cognitions
across a wide age span: We examined 5- to 10-year-old
children’s expectations for other leaders (Study 1) and for
themselves as leaders (Studies 2 and 3). We examined chil-
dren’s interest in leadership (Studies 2 and 3), as well as a
series of associated constructs that are implicated in adult
gender gaps in leadership, including self-efficacy (Studies
2 and 3; e.g., Fox & Lawless, 2011) and the anticipation
of social support (Studies 1–3) and cooperation from oth-
ers (Studies 2 and 3; e.g., Brescoll, 2011; Vial etal., 2016,
2018). We also examined whether children’s beliefs about
leadership and gender are sensitive to contextual features
that mark the leadership role as more (or less) communal
(Study 3), in line with past investigations with adults (e.g.,
Belanger etal., 2020; Schneider etal., 2016). The results
of the three studies, though nuanced and complex, indicate
that gender gaps in children’s expectations for other leaders
may start early, but girls themselves are no less interested
in taking on a leadership role than boys, and emphasizing
the communal aspects of leadership can increase interest in
leadership among some children. The results—particularly
those in Studies 2 and 3—also underscore the value of tak-
ing an intersectional perspective to understand children’s
cognitions, in this case related to gender and leadership (e.g.,
Heck etal., 2021).
Gender Differences inChildren’s Reasoning About
andInterest inLeadership
We found some indication that girls may be more sensitive
than boys to the possibility that children may suffer social
repercussions for taking on a leader role. In Study 1, girls
expected lower social support than boys for other leaders,
regardless of leader gender and across a variety of naturalistic
scenarios relevant to children’s everyday lives (e.g., playing
at the park). However, we found no evidence of gender gaps
in children’s own interest in a leadership role, contrasting
with robust evidence among adult samples (Netchaeva etal.,
2022). In fact, in Study 2, we found that interest in leadership
appeared to increase with age among White girls (whereas
interest did not change or decreased with age for other groups
of children). Furthermore, we found no evidence suggest-
ing a lower sense of self-efficacy in leadership among girls
compared to boys—if anything, some of our results indi-
cate that self-efficacy may be stronger in girls (Study 3), in
contrast to the patterns that have been documented among
adults (e.g., Fox & Lawless, 2011). Moreover, whereas girls
were more likely to anticipate low social support for other
children who took on a leader role (Study 1), we found no
clear gender differences in children’s anticipation of how
much others would support them or cooperate with them
were they to be the leader (Study 2). In fact, in Study 3
we found that girls were more optimistic than boys when
faced with the prospect of occupying a leader role—they
anticipated more social support and more cooperation from
others. As a whole, these patterns indicate that young girls
between the ages of 5 and 10 may not anticipate the nega-
tive repercussions for behaving in leader-like ways that adult
women often fear (e.g., Moss-Racusin & Rudman, 2010) and
encounter (e.g., Eagly & Heilman, 2016), and that gender
gaps in leadership interest may solidify later in life, perhaps
in adolescence (e.g., Bos etal, 2022; Fox & Lawless, 2014).
Thus, our results point to a complex developmental trajectory
of gendered leadership cognitions, and to the possibility that
middle childhood might be a key life stage to intervene to
sustain girls’ interest in leadership. More optimistically, our
results may also point to changing societal attitudes in the
U.S. with respect to women’s role in leadership—changes
that may now be visible only in the attitudes of the younger
generations but will eventually translate into more equitable
representation in leadership positions.
Importantly, children’s leadership cognitions and moti-
vation to lead were sensitive to the way that leadership was
framed. In Study 3, children anticipated more social support
and cooperation from others and exhibited a stronger sense
of self-efficacy as leaders when the leader role was framed
in a way that would afford communal goals (e.g., helping
others) compared to a more self-oriented, agentic framing.
Children in Study 3 also expressed more interest in leader-
ship when the leader role was framed as communal, an effect
that was particularly evident among boys of color. Although
more research is necessary to adjudicate whether emphasiz-
ing agency has a detrimental effect or whether emphasizing
communality has a positive impact (or both), the findings in
Study 3 clearly indicate that children find leadership more
appealing when the leader role is aligned with communal
(vs. agentic) goals.
Surprisingly, children in Study 3 expressed more interest
in the leader role when other children who had been leaders
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
were primarily boys than when boys and girls were equally
represented among past leaders. One possible explanation
for this unexpected finding is that the gender composition
of previous leaders may have shaped children’s perceptions
of the leader role in unanticipated ways. For example, in past
studies, children associated higher prestige, status, or power
with male-dominated roles compared to female-dominated
roles, even when those roles were novel (Liben etal., 2001;
Weisgram etal., 2010). Thus, it is possible that children in
our study may have seen the leader role as more prestigious
and therefore more appealing when most (vs. only half) of
the previous leaders were boys. If so, these findings would
suggest that the pro-male bias in perceptions of status and
prestige that has been identified in children’s thinking about
adult roles may begin very early and extend more generally
to children’s activities—an intriguing notion that may be
fruitful to examine in future research. However, other expla-
nations seem plausible here as well. For instance, the gender
composition of previous leaders may have shaped children’s
inferences about what the game itself is: Perhaps children
inferred that the game entails higher levels of physical activ-
ity or is easier when it is primarily boys who engage in it.
Future investigations may explore these different psycholog-
ical processes to shed light on the reasons why emphasizing
male representation might make leader roles more appealing
to children (including girls) at young ages. Ultimately, our
results indicate that female role models may not always be
effective in boosting girls’ interest in leadership, although
additional research is necessary to draw stronger conclusions
(see also Gladstone & Cimpian, 2021).
Age andRacial/Ethnic Differences inChildren’s
Reasoning About andInterest inLeadership
Children’s leadership cognitions and motivation to lead var-
ied with age and race/ethnicity in complex ways. To start, our
results indicate that children’s expectations about leadership
may become less positive as they grow older. Compared to
younger children, older children in Study 3 anticipated that
others would support them less if they were the leader, sug-
gesting that, with age, children may generally become wary
of the potential social costs of leadership. This finding may
inform interventions designed to increase leadership ambi-
tion in children regardless of gender. Interestingly, we found
some evidence in Study 2 that some girls (i.e., White girls)
may become more interested in leadership over time in the
5- to 10-year-old age span. Together with past findings show-
ing gender gaps in leadership ambition among adolescents
(Bos etal, 2022; Fox & Lawless, 2014) and adults (Netchaeva
etal., 2022), these findings suggest that, perhaps at some point
in middle school, girls’ leadership cognitions may begin to
change, with girls gradually adopting the belief that leadership
is not “for them.” It is possible that these changes may be due
to an accumulation of negative personal experiences of back-
lash for behaving in explicitly dominant ways (e.g., Okimoto &
Brescoll, 2010; Williams & Tiedens, 2016) and/or to continued
exposure to cultural stereotypes equating leadership with boys
and men (Aley & Hahn, 2020; Koenig etal., 2011), but addi-
tional research is necessary to investigate these possibilities.
We also explored whether children of color may differ from
White children in their attitudes toward leadership, and whether
these variations might further depend on child gender, given
that the mismatch between agentic leadership and female ste-
reotypes seems weaker for women and girls of color relative to
White women and girls (e.g., Ghavami & Peplau, 2013; Rosette
etal., 2016). A few results are worth highlighting on this topic.
In Study 1, White children anticipated stronger social support
for girl leaders than boy leaders, whereas children of color did
not differentiate. (Notably, the hypothetical girl and boy leaders
in Study 1 were all White themselves.) In Study 2, interest in
the leader role appeared to increase with age for White girls, but
not for White boys or for children of color. In Study 3, framing
a leader role in communal terms boosted interest in the leader
role particularly strongly among boys of color, and it increased
self-efficacy as leaders among boys and girls of color but not
among White children. Considered together, these findings
may suggest that (a) early leadership cognitions and attitudes
(at this point in time and in this region of the U.S.) tend to be
particularly favorable toward and among White girls, which
is also why (b) it is other groups (particularly, boys of color)
who stand to benefit most from interventions to improve these
cognitions and attitudes.
However, the overall picture that emerges from these find-
ings is not necessarily as cohesive as stated above, and it is
also noteworthy that our studies were not designed to inves-
tigate the moderating role of racial/ethnic background: Our
sample sizes were often too small to allow strong conclu-
sions about intersectional effects. Thus, caution is needed in
interpreting the present findings. Nevertheless, our studies
suggest that children from different racial/ethnic backgrounds
vary in how they think about gender and leadership, and they
underscore the need for additional research into children’s atti-
tudes toward leadership from an intersectional perspective, as
has been proposed by others (e.g., Heck etal., 2021). Future
investigations can build on these preliminary intersectional
findings, further documenting how leadership cognitions may
vary along different axes of identity and developing theory to
articulate when and why these differences may emerge.
Strengths andContributions
Our findings add to a growing literature focused on
understanding how children think of leadership and related
constructs (e.g., Charafeddine etal., 2015; Gülgöz & Gelman,
2017; Reifen-Tagar & Cimpian, 2022; Terrizzi etal., 2019;
Zhao & Kushnir, 2018), and—more directly—they contribute
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
to recent scholarship on children’s beliefs about gender and
leadership (e.g., Bos etal., 2022; Charafeddine etal., 2020;
Mandalaywala etal., 2020; Neff etal., 2007; Patterson etal.,
2019; Reyes-Jaquez & Koenig, 2022). Whereas previous
studies have mostly examined children’s attitudes about adults
who were in positions of authority or who occupied leadership
roles (e.g., Ayman-Nolley & Ayman, 2005; Bigler etal., 2008;
Bos etal., 2022; Neff etal., 2007; Patterson etal., 2019;
Terrizzi etal., 2019), our studies focused on children’s beliefs
and attitudes about leadership in peer contexts (Charafeddine
etal., 2020; Gülgöz, 2015; Mandalaywala etal., 2020; Reyes-
Jaquez & Koenig, 2022), where gender-group norms may be
most salient (e.g., Martin & Fabes, 2021).
Importantly, our results add to growing evidence against
gender gaps in leadership interest among young children
(e.g., Bigler etal., 2008; Patterson etal., 2019; Reyes-Jaquez
& Koenig, 2022; cf. Bos etal., 2022). We found little evi-
dence of gender gaps in leadership interest in peer contexts
even when leadership roles were framed in agentic terms
and were thus inconsistent with stereotypical expectations
for girls’ and women’s behavior. As discussed previously,
these results suggest that—at least in the region of the U.S.
where this research was conducted—gender gaps in leader-
ship ambition may begin to take shape beyond the age range
examined here, in adolescence. This possibility is worth
investigating further.
Unlike most developmental research on this topic, we
framed our investigation drawing from theories that have
proven to be valuable tools for explaining adult gender gaps in
leadership, including goal congruity theory (Diekman & Eagly,
2008) and lack of fit and role congruity theories (Eagly &
Karau, 2002; Heilman, 1983, 2001). This approach inspired
us to examine specific constructs relevant to leadership that,
to our knowledge, had not been investigated in young children
before, including the expectation of social support and coop-
eration from peers. Our studies demonstrate that it is possible
to examine these constructs in age-appropriate ways, reveal-
ing that children consider the social costs of leadership (i.e.,
whether they will be supported by others) from an early age
and that these beliefs are malleable: They change in predict-
able ways based on the context of leadership, such that children
anticipate more support from others when leadership is framed
in communal ways. Future investigations may employ similar
methodologies to expand psychologists’ current understanding
of the developmental origins of leadership cognitions. However,
it should be noted that many of our findings stand in contrast
with predictions drawn from adult-based theories. For example,
we found that children in Study 1 did not expect more negative
reactions to girl (vs. boy) leaders; that girls and boys were simi-
larly interested in leadership roles, even when the roles were
framed in agentic terms (Studies 2 and 3); and that girls overall
appeared more optimistic than boys about others’ social support
were they to be leaders. These patterns suggest that children at
this young age may not be attuned to the potential incongruity
between the female gender role and leadership roles, an intrigu-
ing possibility that highlights the need for further theoretical
elaboration of existing adult theories on gender and leadership
from a developmental perspective.
Finally, we note that our studies provide a comprehen-
sive investigation of children’s leadership cognitions by
approaching this topic from different vantage points—
specifically, how children think of other leaders and how
they think of themselves as leaders. The inclusion of these
two different perspectives revealed mixed patterns that are
worth pursuing further in future research. We found that
girls expected other leaders to face negative social repercus-
sions (Study 1), and yet, they did not expect any less social
support as leaders relative to boys (Studies 2 and 3). It is
possible that these initially-disjointed beliefs may start to
align later on in development, perhaps as girls accumulate
personal experiences with leader-like behavior (and others’
reactions to it). But regardless of the reason for these incon-
sistencies, they highlight the value of collecting data from
different perspectives (e.g., self vs. others), an approach that
future studies may find it useful to adopt as well.
Limitations andFuture Research Directions
A limitation of the present studies is the narrow focus on a
specific aspect of leadership—the ability to give orders, which
is only one dimension of a multifaceted construct. A leader’s
power and social influence involves more than issuing direc-
tives: For instance, they also have the freedom to make deci-
sions independently from others (Gülgöz & Gelman, 2017).
Future research may examine gender gaps in interest in leader
roles across these different dimensions of leadership to arrive
at a more complete understanding of the origins of gender
differences in leadership ambition.
Although we identified age-related differences in children’s
views of leadership (e.g., as they grow older, children’s lead-
ership cognitions may become more negative), the age range
in our studies did not cover the full span of childhood. Future
research extending this line of work to older age groups (e.g.,
11–15-year-olds) might be helpful to more precisely identify
the point at which girls’ leadership cognitions and motivations
begin to resemble those of adult women—for example, exhibit-
ing uncertainty intheir leadership abilities or expecting low levels
of support and cooperation from others. Longitudinal studies
are also necessary to draw stronger conclusions about develop-
mental changes and to potentially illuminate the ebb and flow
of children’s attitudes toward leadership.
Although we took advantage of the diversity of our samples
to investigate racial/ethnic differences in leadership cognitions
and attitudes, our studies were not designed from an intersec-
tional perspective, nor were they sufficiently powered to detect
nuanced intersectional patterns. Another clear limitation is that
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
we treated children of color as a monolithic group. Although
combining multiple racial/ethnic backgrounds into a single
group allowed us to maximize statistical power, children from
these different backgrounds may have meaningfully different
leadership-related experiences (e.g., availability of role mod-
els among prominent leaders), which may in turn affect their
gendered leadership cognitions and attitudes. Additionally, the
stimuli in our studies included only White children, but it is
possible that reactions to child leaders might depend not only
on leader gender but also on leader race, as is the case for reac-
tions to adult leaders (e.g., Rosette etal., 2016). These limita-
tions notwithstanding, we hope that our findings pave the way
for additional research on intersectional leadership cognitions
in children. This work is necessary to fully understand when,
why, and for whom leadership is or is not attractive (Heck
etal., 2021), much as is the case among adults (e.g., Rosette
etal., 2016).
Practice Implications
Our findings highlight the potential value in early interventions
seeking to nurture children’s leadership ambitions. As such, they
have practical implications for educators and parents seeking to
encourage children (including young girls) to pursue leadership
roles in the future. The present studies suggest that gendered
leadership cognitions are unstable and malleable between the
ages of 5 and 10, and that the way in which leadership is dis-
cussed around children (e.g., in the classroom, in educational
materials, in children’s media, or at home) may influence chil-
dren’s attitudes toward leader roles, with potentially meaningful
consequences for gender equality in the long run (e.g., Martin &
Fabes, 2021). Specifically, emphasizing the communal aspects
of leadership, which are known to characterize effective leaders
(e.g., Gartzia & van Knippenberg, 2016; Gerzema & D’Antonio,
2017), could be a powerful way to encourage children to actively
seek out roles that allow them to develop confidence and interest
in leadership. Such interventions may also curtail the develop-
ment of negative social expectations about leadership as chil-
dren age, expectations that we observed in Study 3. Thus, our
findings underscore the importance of challenging the common
view that agency is central to leadership and communality is
peripheral or secondary (Koenig etal., 2011; Vial & Napier,
2018). It is particularly important to change this view among
educators and creators of educational and entertainment media
targeting children, so that they may cultivate more communal
leadership cognitions in younger generations.
Conclusion
Our studies illustrate the utility of adopting a developmental
lens to study leadership cognitions and gender gaps in interest in
leadership. Taken together, our results indicate that gender gaps
in leadership interest, if they still exist in the cultural context
where this research was conducted, may not begin until after
10years of age. Although young girls seem to expect worse
social outcomes for other leaders relative to boys, they also
appear more optimistic than boys about their own prospects as
leaders. Nevertheless, we found evidence that children’s expec-
tations about leaders and leadership generally become more
negative with age. Framing leadership in more communal,
altruistic ways could be an effective way to encourage children’s
participation in activities that allow them to develop leadership
skills, regardless of their gender or racial/ethnic background.
Appendix
Full Script Used toDescribe Novel Game inStudy 3
Agentic Leader Condition
“This is the Zarky Game. In the Zarky Game, children play
together, and they don’t need anyone to be in charge. You
don’t need a boss when playing the Zarky Game. But some-
times, one of the kids in the game wants to be the Zarky Boss.
At the beginning of the game, all the kids are sitting down,
see? If a kid stands up and says, ‘I will be the Zarky Boss,’
then this kid becomes the Zarky Boss. The Zarky Boss is then
in charge of the game, makes decisions, and tells everyone
else what to do. Even though you don’t need a boss when
playing the Zarky Game, some kids decide to stand up and
take charge. The kids who stay seated and who do not stand
up are the followers. They do whatever the Zarky Boss says.”
Communal Leader Condition
“This is the Zarky Game. In the Zarky Game, children play
together and it is very helpful if one of them is in charge. It
is very helpful to have a boss when playing the Zarky Game.
Sometimes, one of the kids in the game wants to be the Zarky
Boss. At the beginning of the game, all the kids are sitting
down, see? If a kid stands up and says, ‘I will be the Zarky
Boss,’ then this kid becomes the Zarky Boss. The Zarky Boss is
then in charge of the game, makes decisions, and tells everyone
else what to do. Because it is very helpful to have a boss when
playing the Zarky Game, some kids decide to stand up and take
charge. The kids who stay seated and who do not stand up are
the followers. They do whatever the Zarky Boss says.”
Majority Male Role Model Condition (left) &
Gender‑balanced Role Model Condition (right)
“Look! All of these kids played the Zarky Game last week,
and they decided that they wanted to be the Zarky Boss. See?
Many boys and [some/many] girls decided that they wanted
to be the Zarky Boss.”
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Consent for Publication Both authors consent to the current submission
for publication in Sex Roles.
Competing Interests The authors have no known conflicts of interest
to disclose.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri-
bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta-
tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes
were made. The images or other third party material in this article are
included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated
otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in
the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a
copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
References
Aley, M., & Hahn, L. (2020). The powerful male hero: A content anal-
ysis of gender representation in posters for children’s animated
movies. Sex Roles, 83(7–8), 499–509. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/
s11199- 020- 01127-z
Asaba, M., & Gweon, H. (2022). Young children infer and manage what
others think about them. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 119(32), e2105642119. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1073/ pnas.
21056 42119
Acknowledgements We are grateful to the members of the Cognitive
Development Lab at New York University for assisting with data col-
lection, particularly Madison Charlton, Juhi Dalal, Ingrid Friedman,
Claire O’Leary, Alessia Seroff, and Molly Tallberg. Some of the data
and preliminary write-ups of this research have been previously posted
on PsyArXiv and presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for
Research on Child Development and at the Biennial Meeting of the
Cognitive Development Society.
Author Contributions Both authors contributed to the study conception
and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were
performed by A. C. Vial. The first draft of the manuscript was written
by A. C. Vial, and both authors commented on previous versions of
the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding This work was funded by Mattel Inc.’s Dream Gap Postdoc-
toral Fellowship in Child Development awarded to A. C.Vial and by
U.S. National Science Foundation grant BCS-1733897 awarded toA.
Cimpian.
Data Availability The full materials, raw data, analytic syntax, and
supplementary analyses for the three studies are available on the Open
Science Framework (OSF): https:// osf. io/ h684j/.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate Parental informed con-
sent and participant verbal assent was obtained prior to the study. The
research was approved by the institutional review board at New York
University (IRB-FY2016-1163).
Human and Animal Ethics The research was approved by the insti-
tutional review board at New York University (IRB-FY2016-1163).
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Ayman-Nolley, S., & Ayman, R. (2005). Children’s implicit theory of leader-
ship. In B. Schyns & J. R. Meindl (Eds.), Implicit leadership theories:
Essays and explorations (pp. 189-233). Information Age Publishing.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behav-
ioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1037/ 0033- 295X. 84.2. 191
Banse, R., Gawronski, B., Rebetez, C., Gutt, H., & Morton, J. B.
(2010). The development of spontaneous gender stereotyping in
childhood: Relations to stereotype knowledge and stereotype flex-
ibility. Developmental Science, 13(2), 298–306. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1111/j. 1467- 7687. 2009. 00880.x
Bauer, N. M., Harman, M., & Russell, E. B. (2022). Do voters punish
ambitious women? Tracking a gendered backlash toward the 2020
democratic presidential contenders. Political Behavior, 1–20.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11109- 022- 09805-2
Belanger, A. L., Joshi, M. P., Fuesting, M. A., Weisgram, E. S., Claypool,
H. M., & Diekman, A. B. (2020). Putting belonging in context:
Communal affordances signal belonging in STEM. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(8), 1186–1204. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1177/ 01461 67219 897181
Bigler, R. S., Arthur, A. E., Hughes, J. M., & Patterson, M. M. (2008).
The politics of race and gender: Children’s perceptions of dis-
crimination and the U.S. presidency.Analyses of Social Issues
and Public Policy (ASAP), 8(1), 83–112.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j.
1530- 2415. 2008. 00161.x
Bigler, R. S., Averhart, C. J., & Liben, L. S. (2003). Race and the work-
force: Occupational status, aspirations, and stereotyping among
African American children. Developmental Psychology, 39(3),
572–580. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0012- 1649. 39.3. 572
Block, K., Gonzalez, A. M., Schmader, T., & Baron, A. S. (2018). Early
gender differences in core values predict anticipated family ver-
sus career orientation. Psychological Science, 29(9), 1540–1547.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09567 97618 776942
Bos, A. L., Greenlee, J. S., Holmsn, M. R., Oxley, Z. M., & Lay, J. C.
(2022). This one’s for the boys: How gendered political socialization
limits girls’ political ambition and interest. American Political Science
Review, 116(2), 484–501. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ s0003 05542 10010 27
Brescoll, V. L. (2011). Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power,
and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly,
56(4), 622–641. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 00018 39212 439994
Brown, E. R., & Diekman, A. B. (2010). What will I be? Exploring
gender differences in near and distant possible selves. Sex Roles,
63(7–8), 568–579. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11199- 010- 9827-x
Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender
development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106(4),
676–713. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0033- 295X. 106.4. 676
Caleo, S., & Halim, M. L. D. (2021). Gender and the development
of leadership stereotypes. Psychological Inquiry, 32(2), 72–76.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 10478 40X. 2021. 19307 45
Catalyst. (2022). Pyramid: Women in the United States workforce
(Infographic). https:// www. catal yst. org/ resea rch/ women- in- t he-
united- states- workf orce/
Chaplin, T. M., Cole, P. M., & Zahn-Waxler, C. (2005). Parental social-
ization of emotion expression: Gender differences and relations to
child adjustment. Emotion, 5(1), 80–88. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/
1528- 3542.5. 1. 80
Charafeddine, R., Mercier, H., Clément, F., Kaufmann, L., Berchtold,
A., Reboul, A., & Van der Henst, J.-B. (2015). How preschoolers
use cues of dominance to make sense of their social environment.
Journal of Cognition and Development, 16(4), 587–607. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15248 372. 2014. 926269
Charafeddine, R., Zambrana, I. M., Triniol, B., Mercier, H., Clément,
F., Kaufmann, L., Reboul, A., Pons, F., & Van der Henst, J.-B.
(2020). How preschoolers associate power with gender in male-
female interactions: A cross-cultural investigation. Sex Roles,
83(7–8), 453–473. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11199- 019- 01116-x
Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to
counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleabil-
ity of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 40(5), 642–658. https:// doi. or g/ 10. 1016/j. jesp.
2004. 02. 003
Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010).
Seeking congruity between goals and roles. Psychological Science,
21(8), 1051–1057. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09567 97610 377342
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Of men, women, and motivation:
A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.),
Handbook of motivation science (pp. 434–447). The Guilford Press.
Diekman, A. B., Joshi, M. P., White, A. D., & Vuletich, H. A. (2021).
Roots, barriers, and scaffolds: Integrating developmental and
structural insights to understand gender disparities in political
leadership. Psychological Inquiry, 32(2), 77–82. https:// doi. org/
10. 1080/ 10478 40X. 2021. 19307 52
Dolan, K., & Lawless, J. L. (2021). The importance of political sci-
ence for understanding the developmental roots of gender gaps in
politics. Psychological Inquiry, 32(2), 83–88. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1080/ 10478 40X. 2021. 19307 62
Eagly, A. H., & Heilman, M. E. (2016). Gender and leadership: Intro-
duction to the special issue. [Editorial].The Leadership Quarterly,
27(3), 349–353. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. leaqua. 2016. 04. 002
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice
toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037// 0033- 295X. 109.3. 573
Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M., & Sczesny, S.
(2020). Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-
analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018.American
Psychologist, 75(3), 301–315.https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ amp00 00494
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2020). From expectancy-value theory
to situated expectancy-value theory: A developmental, social
cognitive, and sociocultural perspective on motivation. Contem-
porary Educational Psychology, 61, 101859. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1016/j. cedps ych. 2020. 101859
England, P., Levine, A., & Mishel, E. (2020). Progress toward gender
equality in the United States has slowed or stalled. Proceed-
ings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(13), 6990–6997.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1073/ pnas. 19188 91117
Evans, C. D., & Diekman, A. B. (2009). On motivated role selection:
Gender beliefs, distant goals, and career interest. Psychology
of Women Quarterly, 33(2), 235–249. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j.
1471- 6402. 2009. 01493.x
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power
3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social,
behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Meth-
ods, 39(2), 175–191. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3758/ bf031 93146
Fisk, S. R., & Overton, J. (2019). Who wants to lead? Anticipated
gender discrimination reduces women’s leadership ambitions.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 82(3), 319–332. https:// doi. org/
10. 1177/ 01902 72519 863424
Fox, R. L., & Lawless, J. L. (2010). If only they’d ask: Gender,
recruitment, and political ambition. The Journal of Politics,
72(2), 310–326. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ s0022 38160 99907 52
Fox, R. L., & Lawless, J. L. (2011). Gendered perceptions and
political candidacies: A central barrier to women’s equality in
electoral politics. American Journal of Political Science, 55(1),
59–73. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1540- 5907. 2010. 00484.x
Fox, R. L., & Lawless, J. L. (2014). Uncovering the origins of the gen-
der gap in political ambition. American Political Science Review,
108(3), 499–519. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S0003 05541 40002 27
Galinsky, A. D., Hall, E. V., & Cuddy, A. J. (2013). Gendered races:
Implications for interracial marriage, leadership selection, and
athletic participation. Psychological Science, 24(4), 498–506.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09567 97612 457783
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Gartzia, L., & van Knippenberg, D. (2016). Too masculine, too bad:
Effects of communion on leaders’ promotion of cooperation.
Group & Organization Management, 41(4), 458–490. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 10596 01115 583580
Gerzema, J., & D’Antonio, M. (2017). The Athena doctrine: Millen-
nials seek feminine values in leadership. Journal of Leadership
Studies, 10(4), 63–65. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ jls. 21506
Ghavami, N., & Peplau, L. A. (2013). An intersectional analysis of
gender and ethnic stereotypes: Testing three hypotheses. Psy-
chology of Women Quarterly, 37(1), 113–127. https:// doi. org/
10. 1177/ 03616 84312 464203
Gladstone, J. R., & Cimpian, A. (2021). Which role models are effec-
tive for which students? A systematic review and four recom-
mendations for maximizing the effectiveness of role models in
STEM. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 1–20.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s40594- 021- 00315-x
Goodwin, R. D., Dodson, S. J., Chen, J. M., & Diekmann, K. A.
(2020). Gender, sense of power, and desire to lead: Why women
don’t “Lean In” to apply to leadership groups that are majority-
male. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 44(4), 468–487. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 03616 84320 939065
Gülgöz, S. (2015). Developing a concept of social power relationships
[Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan]. https:// deepb lue.
lib. umich. edu/ bitst ream/ handle/ 2027. 42/ 111623/ sgulg oz_1. pdf
Gülgöz, S., & Gelman, S. A. (2017). Who’s the boss? Concepts of
social power across development. Child Development, 88(3),
946–963. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ cdev. 12643
Heck, I. A., Santhanagopalan, R., Cimpian, A., & Kinzler, K. D.
(2021). Understanding the developmental roots of gender gaps in
politics. Psychological Inquiry, 32(2), 53–71. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1080/ 10478 40X. 2021. 19307 41
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The Lack of Fit
model. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 269–298.
Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender ste-
reotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder.
Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657–674. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/
0022- 4537. 00234
Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penal-
ized for success at male tasks? The implied communality deficit.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 81–92. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1037/ 0021- 9010. 92.1. 81
Hibbard, D. R., & Buhrmester, D. (1998). The role of peers in the
socialization of gender-related social interaction styles. Sex Roles,
39(3–4), 185–202. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1023/A: 10188 46303 929
Hsu, N., Badura, K. L., Newman, D. A., & Speach, M. E. P. (2021).
Gender, “masculinity”, and “femininity”: A meta-analytic review
of gender differences in agency and communion. Psychological
Bulletin, 147(10), 987–1011. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ bul00 00343
Hughes, J. (2017). paramtest: Run a function iteratively while varying
parameters. R package version 0.1. https:// CRAN.R- proje ct. org/
packa ge= param test
Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011).
Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three
research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 616–642.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0023 557
Lei, R. F., & Rhodes, M. (2021). Why developmental research on
social categorization needs intersectionality. Child Development
Perspectives, 15(3), 143–147. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ cdep. 12421
Levi, M., Sacks, A., & Tyler, T. (2009). Conceptualizing legitimacy,
measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist,
53(3), 354–375. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 00027 64209 338797
Liben, L. S., Bigler, R. S., & Krogh, H. R. (2001). Pink and blue collar
jobs: Children’s judgments of job status and job aspirations in
relation to sex of worker. Journal of Experimental Child Psy-
chology, 79(4), 346–363. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1006/ jecp. 2000. 2611
Livingston, R. W., Rosette, A. S., & Washington, E. F. (2012). Can an
agentic Black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interper-
sonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders. Psychological
Science, 23, 354–358. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 09567 97611 428079
Magee, J. C., & Frasier, C. W. (2014). Status and power: The principal
inputs to influence for public managers. Public Administration
Review, 74(3), 307–317. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ puar. 12203
Mandalaywala, T. M., Tai, C., & Rhodes, M. (2020). Children’s use of
race and gender as cues to social status. PLoS ONE, 15(6), Article
e0234398. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 02343 98
Martin, C. L., & Fabes, R. A. (2021). Taking a social-relational (and
developmental) perspective on the roots of gender gaps in political
leadership. Psychological Inquiry, 32(2), 117–123. https:// doi. org/
10. 1080/ 10478 40x. 2021. 19307 78
Martin, C. L., & Ruble, D. N. (2010). Patterns of gender development.
Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 353–381. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1146/ annur ev. psych. 093008. 100511
Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Rudman, L. A. (2010). Disruptions in wom-
en’s self-promotion: The backlash avoidance model. Psychology
of Women Quarterly, 34(2), 186–202. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j.
1471- 6402. 2010. 01561.x
Neff, K. D., Cooper, C. E., & Woodruff, A. L. (2007). Children’s and
adolescents’ developing perceptions of gender inequality. Social
Development, 16(4), 682–699. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1467-
9507. 2007. 00411.x
Netchaeva, E., Kouchaki, M., & Sheppard, L. D. (2015). A man’s (pre-
carious) place: Men’s experienced threat and self-assertive reac-
tions to female superiors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle-
tin, 41(9), 1247–1259. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 01461 67215 593491
Netchaeva, E., Sheppard, L. D., & Balushkina, T. (2022). A meta-
analytic review of the gender difference in leadership aspira-
tions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 137, 103744. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1016/j. jvb. 2022. 103744
O’Brien, L. T., Hitti, A., Shaffer, E., Camp, A. R., Henry, D., &
Gilbert, P. N. (2017). Improving girls’ sense of fit in science.
Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(3), 301–309.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 19485 50616 671997
Okimoto, T. G., & Brescoll, V. L. (2010). The price of power: Power
seeking and backlash against female politicians. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(7), 923–936. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1177/ 01461 67210 371949
Pate, J., & Fox, R. (2018). Getting past the gender gap in political
ambition. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 156,
166–183. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jebo. 2018. 10. 002
Patterson, M. M., Bigler, R. S., Pahlke, E., Brown, C. S., Hayes,
A. R., Ramirez, M. C., & Nelson, A. (2019). Toward a devel-
opmental science of politics. Monographs of the Society for
Research in Child Development, 84(3), 7–185. https:// doi. org/
10. 1111/ mono. 12410
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical
computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna,
Austria. https:// www.R- proje ct. org/
Reifen-Tagar, M., & Cimpian, A. (2022). Political ideology in early
childhood: Making the case for studying young children in
political psychology. Political Psychology, 43, 77–105. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1111/ pops. 12853
Reyes-Jaquez, B., & Koenig, M. A. (2021). The development of a
morality against power abuse: The case of bribery. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 150(11), 2362. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1037/ xge00 00926
Reyes-Jaquez, B., & Koenig, M. A. (2022). Early presence of a
“power = males” association: Girls link power to their gender
less often than boys but can be as motivated to gain it.Journal
of Experimental Child Psychology, 105419. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1016/j. jecp. 2022. 105419
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sex Roles
1 3
Rosette, A. S., Koval, C. Z., Ma, A., & Livingston, R. (2016). Race
matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic
deficiencies and penalties. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3),
429–445. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. leaqua. 2016. 01. 008
Rosette, A. S., & Tost, L. P. (2010). Agentic women and commu-
nal leadership: How role prescriptions confer advantage to top
women leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 221–235.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ a0018 204
Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereo-
typic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype main-
tenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2),
157–176. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ 0022- 3514. 87.2. 157
Schneider, M. C., Holman, M. R., Diekman, A. B., & McAndrew,
T. (2016). Power, conflict, and community: How gendered
views of political power influence women’s political ambi-
tion. Political Psychology, 37(4), 515–531. https:// doi. org/
10. 1111/ pops. 12268
Schuh, S. C., Hernandez Bark, A. S., Van Quaquebeke, N., Hossiep,
R., Frieg, P., & Van Dick, R. (2014). Gender differences in lead-
ership role occupancy: The mediating role of power motivation.
Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3), 363–379. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1007/ s10551- 013- 1663-9
Sebanc, A. M., Pierce, S. L., Cheatham, C. L., & Gunnar, M. R. (2003).
Gendered social worlds in preschool: Dominance, peer acceptance and
assertive social skills in boys’ and girls’ peer groups. Social Develop-
ment, 12(1), 91–106. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ 1467- 9507. 00223
Shapiro, M., Grossman, D., Carter, S., Martin, K., Deyton, P., &
Hammer, D. (2015). Middle school girls and the “leaky pipeline”
to leadership. Middle School Journal, 46(5), 3–13. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 1080/ 00940 771. 2015. 11461 919
Sheppard, L. D. (2018). Gender differences in leadership aspirations
and job and life attribute preferences among U.S. undergraduate
students. Sex Roles, 79(9–10), 565–577. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/
s11199- 017- 0890-4
StataCorp. (2019). Stata statistical software (Version 16). Computer
software. https:// stata. com/
Stavans, M., & Baillargeon, R. (2019). Infants expect leaders to right
wrongs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
116(33), 16292–16301. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1073/ pnas. 18200 91116
Stavans, M., & Diesendruck, G. (2021). Children hold leaders primar-
ily responsible, not entitled. Child Development, 92(1), 308–323.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ cdev. 13420
Terrizzi, B. F., Brey, E., Shutts, K., & Beier, J. S. (2019). Children’s
developing judgments about the physical manifestations of power.
Developmental Psychology, 55(4), 793–808. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1037/ dev00 00657
Tomasello, M. (2014). The ultra-social animal. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 44(3), 187–194. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ ejsp. 2015
Tyler, T. R. (2002). Leadership and cooperation in groups. American
Behavioral Scientist, 45(5), 769–782. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/
00027 64202 04500 5003
Vial, A. C., Brescoll, V. L., Napier, J. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Tyler, T. R.
(2018). Differential support for female supervisors among men
and women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(2), 215–227.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ apl00 00258
Vial, A. C., & Cowgill, C. M. (2022). Heavier lies her crown: Gen-
dered patterns of leader emotional labor and their downstream
effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 849566. https:// doi. org/ 10.
3389/ fpsyg. 2022. 849566
Vial, A. C., & Napier, J. L. (2018). Unnecessary frills: Communality as
a nice (but expendable) trait in leaders. Frontiers in Psychology,
9, 1866. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2018. 01866
Vial, A. C., Napier, J. L., & Brescoll, V. L. (2016). A bed of thorns:
Female leaders and the self-reinforcing cycle of illegitimacy. The
Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 400–414. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
leaqua. 2015. 12. 004
Weisgram, E. S., Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Gender, val-
ues, and occupational interests among children, adolescents, and
adults. Child Development, 81(3), 778–796. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1111/j. 1467- 8624. 2010. 01433.x
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of
achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology,
25(1), 68–81. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1006/ ceps. 1999. 1015
Williams, M. J., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2016). The subtle suspension of
backlash: A meta-analysis of penalties for women’s implicit and
explicit dominance behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 142(2),
165–197. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ bul00 00039
Witt, M. G., & Wood, W. (2010). Self-regulation of gendered behavior
in everyday life. Sex Roles, 62(9–10), 635–646. https:// doi. org/ 10.
1007/ s11199- 010- 9761-y
World Economic Forum. (2020). Global gender gap report 2020.
https:// www3. wefor um. org/ docs/ WEF_ GGGR_ 2020. pdf
Zhao, X., & Kushnir, T. (2018). Young children consider individual
authority and collective agreement when deciding who can change
rules. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 165, 101–116.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jecp. 2017. 04. 004
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com