Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Tale of Two Gender Roles: The Effects of Implicit and Explicit Gender Role Traditionalism and Occupational Stereotype on Hiring Decisions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Gender Issues Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The current study examined how individual difference characteristics of an evaluator could affect real-world decisions, such as hiring decisions. Specifically, this study examined the gender role traditionalism of an evaluator, and whether this traditionalism interacted with occupational stereotypes during a laboratory simulated hiring decision. Gender role stereotypes were activated using a priming task, then participants evaluated male and female job applicants on a variety of work-related skills, ultimately selecting applicants for either a traditionally masculine or feminine position. Analyses revealed that applicants were more often selected for a position in which the occupation stereotype matched their gender suggesting an effect of an evaluator’s gender role traditionalism. In addition, those participants indicating that they held more traditional gender role beliefs tended to favor male applicants in their evaluations. Finally, the activation of ideas incongruent with traditional gender role stereotypes resulted in higher ratings on work-related skills from all participants, though these ratings did not seem to impact the overall hiring decision. This study highlights the impact of individual difference characteristics of an evaluator during a hiring decision, and identifies some possible ways to move toward a more impartial hiring process to reduce gender biases in hiring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beere, C. A., King, D. W., Beere, D. B., & King, L. A. (1984). The sex-role egalitarianism scale: A measure of attitudes toward equality between the sexes. Sex Roles, 10(7–8), 563–576.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bem, S. L. (1981). Bem sex role inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blair, I. V., & Banaji, M. R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Gender bias in leader selection? Evidence from a hiring simulation study. Sex Roles, 65, 234–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Carli, L. L., Alawa, L., Lee, Y., Zhao, B., & Kim, E. (2016). Stereotypes about gender and science women ≠ scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly. doi:10.1177/0361684315622645.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cohen, S. L., & Bunker, K. A. (1975). Subtle effects of sex role stereotypes on recruiters’ hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(5), 566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Corbett, C., & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the equation: The variables for women’s success in engineering and computing. DC: AAUW.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Davidson, H. K., & Burke, M. J. (2000). Sex discrimination is simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 225–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Davies, P. G., 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Liben, L. S., Bigler, R. S., & Krogh, H. R. (2002). Language at work: Children’s gendered interpretations of occupational titles. Child Development, 73(3), 810–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, 109, 16474–16479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. National Research Council (2010). Gender differences at critical transitions in the careers of science, engineering, and mathematics faculty. National Academies Press. Retrieved from: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12062/gender-differences-at-critical-transitions-in-the-careers-of-science-engineering-and-mathematics-faculty.

  19. National Science Foundation (2014). Science and engineering indicators. Retrieved from: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/.

  20. Reinhard, M. A., Schindler, S., Messner, M., Stahlberg, D., & Mucha, N. (2011). I don’t know anything about soccer: How personal weaknesses and strengths guide inferences about women’s qualifications in sex-typed jobs. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 70, 149–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rice, L., & Barth, J. M. (2016). Hiring decisions: The effect of evaluator gender and gender stereotype characteristics on the evaluation of job applicants. Gender Issues, 33(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Roth, P. L., Purvis, K. L., & Bobko, P. (2012). A meta-analysis of gender group differences for measures of job performance in field studies. Journal of Management, 38(2), 719–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2010). The effect of priming gender roles on women’s implicit gender beliefs and career aspirations. Social Psychology, 41(3), 192–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Suzuki, A. (1991). Egalitarian sex role attitudes: Scale development and comparison of American and Japanese women. Sex Roles, 24, 245–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Weisgram, E. S., Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Gender, values, and occupational interests among children, adolescents, and adults. Child Development, 81(3), 778–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Weisgram, E. S., Dinella, L. M., & Fulcher, M. (2011). The role of masculinity/femininity, values, and occupational value affordances in shaping young men’s and women’s occupational choices. Sex roles, 65(3–4), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Box 42051, Lubbock, TX, 79409-2051, USA

    Lindsay Rice

  2. Institute for Social Science Research, University of Alabama, Box 870216, Tuscaloosa, AL, 35487-0216, USA

    Joan M. Barth

Authors
  1. Lindsay Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joan M. Barth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lindsay Rice.

Additional information

This study was conducted as part of the first author’s doctoral dissertation research at the University of Alabama. The authors would like to thank the dissertation committee that provided comments on this research including William P. Hart, Debra M. McCallum, Beverly Roskos, and Alexa Tullett from The University of Alabama. Finally, the first author would like to dedicate this manuscript in loving memory of Aspen, a faithful companion present for many aspects of this research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rice, L., Barth, J.M. A Tale of Two Gender Roles: The Effects of Implicit and Explicit Gender Role Traditionalism and Occupational Stereotype on Hiring Decisions. Gend. Issues 34, 86–102 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-016-9175-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-016-9175-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation