How might gendered stereotypes contribute to more subtle forms of discrimination practiced in organizations today? Explain two stereotypes. Provide an example of how they might be enacted in organizational life. How does each of these limit opportunities?
Part A : Post a 200–300 word response to the question.
How might gendered stereotypes contribute to more subtle forms of discrimination practiced in organizations today? Explain two stereotypes. Provide an example of how they might be enacted in organizational life. How does each of these limit opportunities?
Gender bias and institutional barriers can contribute to disparities between women and men, often in complex ways. Bias both inside and outside research communities may influence women’s and men’s careers in science and technology. Forms of bias and barriers include:
1. Stereotypes and Gender Roles
2. Hiring, Promotion, and Evaluation
3. Partnering and Family Patterns
4. Harassment
1. Stereotypes and Gender Roles
Characteristics associated with leadership are viewed as incongruent with women’s gender roles.
This means that women may face prejudice in leadership evaluations. Women, for example, who display assertiveness may be perceived as competent, but unpleasant.
Vinkenburg, C., Van Engen, M., Eagly, A., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. (2011). An Exploration of Stereotypical Beliefs about Leadership Styles: Is Transformational Leadership a Route to Women’s Promotion?The Leadership Quarterly, 22 (1), . 10-21.
Eagly, A.H., & Carli, L.L. (2007). Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Scott, K., & Brown, D. (2006). Female First, Leader Second? Gender Bias in the Encoding of Leadership Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101 (2), 230-242.
Images of scientists are persistently masculine.
Decades of “draw-a-scientist” research indicate that children tend to depict scientists as men, although the number of scientists drawn as women is increasing. In a recent study, participants rated images of real tenured and tenure-track women scientists for femininity and likelihood of being a scientist.
Women scientists who were perceived as more feminine were judged less likely to be scientists. Scientists continue to be depicted as Caucasian despite the prominence of Asians in science.
Banchefsky, S., Westfall, J., Park, B., & Judd, C. (2016). But You Don’t Look Like a Scientist!: Women Scientists with Feminine Appearance are Deemed Less Likely to be Scientists. Sex Roles, 75 (3), 95-109.
Fralick, B., Kearn, J., Thompson, S., & Lyons, J. (2008). How Middle Schoolers Draw Engineers and Scientists. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 60-73.
Finson, K. (2002). Drawing a Scientist: What We Do and Do Not Know After Fifty Years of Drawings. School Science and Mathematics, 102 (7), 335-345.
Rahm, J., & Charbonneau, P. (1997). Probing Stereotypes Through Students’ Drawings of Scientists. American Journal of Physics, 65, 774-778.
Gender bias embedded in notions of scientific excellence affects the evaluation and selection of women in science.
Gender bias has shaped the normative standards of science, including selection procedures for awards and grants, and definitions of scientific competence and quality. Data from the Spanish National Institute of Statistics shows that men associate professors are 2.5 times more likely than women associate professors to be promoted to full professors—even when age, time since Ph.D., field, and measures of academic productibility (such as output of books and peer-reviewed articles) are controlled for.
Unidad de Mujeres y Ciencia (UMYC). (2011). White Paper on the Position of Women in Science in Spain.
Addis, E. (2010). Meta-Analysis of Gender and Science Research Topic Report: Gender and Scientific Excellence. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Brouns, M. (2004). Gender and the Assessment of Scientific Quality. In European Commission, Gender and Excellence in the Making, pp. 147-155. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Mothers are viewed as less competent than women who are not mothers.
In a recent experimental study in which participants evaluated application materials for women job candidates who differed only by parental status, mothers were perceived as less competent and received a lower starting salary than non-mothers. Men were not penalized for, and sometimes benefited from, being a parent. A follow-up study showed that actual employers discriminate against mothers, but not fathers.
Correll, S., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a Job: Is there a Motherhood Penalty? American Journal of Sociology, 112 (5), 1297-1338.
Williams, J. (2004). Hitting the Maternal Wall. Academe, 90 (6), 16-21.
Stereotype threat can undermine performance.
The fear of conforming to negative stereotypes about ability in a particular domain impedes performance in that domain. For example, girls and young women who are reminded of negative stereotypes concerning their math abilities tend to underperform on math tests.
Aronson, J., Lustina, M., Good, C., & Keough, K. (1999). When White Men Can’t Do Math: Necessary and Sufficient Factors in Stereotype Threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35 (1), 29-46.
Nosek, B. et al. (2009). National Differences in Gender—Science Stereotypes Predict National Sex Differences in Science and Math Achievement. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences of the United States of America, 106 (26), 10593-10597.
Spencer, S., Steele, C., & Quinn, D. (1999). Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35 (1), 4-28.
Steele, C. (1997). A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Performance. American Psychologist, 52 (6), 613-629.
However, stereotype threat is moderated by “identity safe environments.”
Counter-stereotype messages about leadership reduce women’s vulnerability to negative cues and images that would otherwise undermine their leadership aspirations.
Kane, J., & Mertz, J. (2012). Debunking Myths about Gender and Mathematics Performance. Notices of the American Mathematical Society (AMS), 59 (1), 10-21.
Davies, P., Spencer, S.J., & Steele, C.M. (2005). Clearing the Air: Identity Safety Moderates the Effects of Stereotype Threat on Women’s Leadership Aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88 (2), 276-287.
Gendered beliefs about competence may influence career choices.
Boys tend to rate their mathematical competence more highly than do girls of equal measured ability. Self-rated competence, in turn, has a direct effect on selecting quantitative college majors.
Gendered patterns of self-selection into certain career pathways, in other words, are at least partly driven by a gendered sense of what one is good at, not simply aptitude or interest.
Correll, S. (2001). Gender and the Career Choice Process: The Role of Biased Self-Assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1691-1730.
Despite high levels of achievement, women can suffer from an “imposter syndrome” in academic science settings, lacking confidence in their intellectual accomplishments and ability, and a sense of belonging.
Jöstl, G., Bergsmann, E., Lüftenegger, M., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2012). When Will They Blow My Cover? The Imposter Phenomenon among Austrian Doctoral Students. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 220 (2), 109-120.
Clance, P., & Imes, S. (1978). The Imposter Phenomenon in High-Achieving Women: Dynamics and Therapeutic Intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15, 241-247.
Stereotypical objects in science workspaces discourage interest among groups that do not “fit” the stereotype.
Objects stereotyped as masculine (Star Trek posters, computer parts, comics) can diminish women’s sense of “ambient belonging” in a given scientific community, and lead to lower levels of interest in joining this community. Science environments, in short, send powerful signals about who should participate.
Cheryan, S., Meltzoff, A., & Kim, S. (2011). Classrooms Matter: The Design of Virtual Classrooms Influences Gender Disparities in Computer Science Classes. Computers and Education, 57 (2), 1825-1835.
Cheryan, S., Plaut, V.C., Davies, P.G., & Steele, C.M. (2009). Ambient Belonging: How Stereotypical Cues Impact Gender Participation in Computer Science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (6), 1045-1060.