Sex Roles

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 307–319 | Cite as

Sex bias in hiring: Effects of job demands and applicant competence

  • Eugenia Proctor Gerdes
  • Douglas M. Garber


Managers in a large corporation evaluated application materials representing one of eight hypothetical job candidates. In order to examine the effects of two types of information on sex bias, three factors were manipulated in a factorial design: (1) Applicants were either male or female engineers; (2) they appeared highly competent or moderately competent based on academic performance; (3) they were applying for an engineering job that entailed either technical engineering tasks or managerial tasks in addition to the technical tasks. Greater discrimination against women occurred in evaluations for the technical-managerial job, even with highly competent applicants. These results are explained in terms of ambiguity: Because it was not obvious that applicants would succeed on the additional managerial tasks, the evaluators resorted to stereotypes in order to make their predictions.


Social Psychology Factorial Design Academic Performance Large Corporation Managerial Task 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beattie, M. Y., & Diehl, L. A. Effects of social conditions on the expression of sex-role stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 1979, 4, 241–255.Google Scholar
  2. Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. Sex-role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 28, 59–78.Google Scholar
  3. Cash, T. F., Gillen, B., & Burns, D. S. Sexism and “beautyism” in personnel consultant decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 301–310.Google Scholar
  4. Clifford, M. M., & Looft, W. R. Academic employment interviews: Effect of sex and race. Educational Research, 1971, 22, 6–8.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, S. L., & Bunker, K. A. Subtle effects of sex role stereotypes on recruiter's hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 566–572.Google Scholar
  6. Dipboye, R. L., Arvey, R. D., & Terpstra, D. E. Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applicants as determinants of resume evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 288–294.Google Scholar
  7. Dipboye, R. L., Fromkin, H. L., & Wiback, K. Relative importance of applicant sex, attractiveness and scholastic standing in evaluation of job applicant resumes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 39–43.Google Scholar
  8. Dipboye, R. L., & Wiley, J. W. Reactions of male raters to interviewee self-presentation style and sex: Extensions of previous research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1978, 13, 192–203.Google Scholar
  9. Fidell, L. S. Empirical verification of sex discrimination in hiring practices in psychology. American Psychologist, 1970, 25, 1094–1098.Google Scholar
  10. Frieze, I. H., Parsons, J. E. Johnson, P. B., Ruble, D. N., & Zellman, G. L. Women and sex roles: A social psychological perspective. New York: Norton, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. Gerdes, E. P., & Kelman, J. H. Sex discrimination: Effects of sex-role incongruence, evaluator sex, and stereotypes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1981, 2, 219–226.Google Scholar
  12. Kiesler, S. B. Actuarial prejudice toward women and its implications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1975, 5, 201–206.Google Scholar
  13. Levinson, R. M. Sex discrimination and employment practices: An experiment with unconventional job inquiries. Social Problems, 1975, 22, 533–543.Google Scholar
  14. Massengill, D., & Di Marco, N Sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics: A current replication. Sex Roles, 1979, 5, 561–570.Google Scholar
  15. Muchinsky, P. M., & Harris, S. L. The effect of applicant sex and scholastic standing on the evaluation of job applicant resumes in sex-typed occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1977, 11, 95–108.Google Scholar
  16. Piacente, B. S., Penner, L. A., Hawkins, H. L., & Cohen, S. L. Evaluation of the performance of experimenters as a function of their sex and competence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1974, 4, 321–329.Google Scholar
  17. Renwick, P. A., & Tosi, H. The effects of sex, marital status, and educational background on selection decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 1978, 21, 93–103.Google Scholar
  18. Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. Effects of applicant's sex and difficulty of job on evaluation of candidates for managerial positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 511–512. (a)Google Scholar
  19. Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. Influence of sex role stereotypes on personnel decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 9–14. (b)Google Scholar
  20. Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. Sex role stereotyping in the executive suite. Harvard Business Review, 1974, 52(2), 45–58. (c)Google Scholar
  21. Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. The psychological basis for sex role stereotypes: A note on Terborg and Ilgen's conclusions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 14, 151–153.Google Scholar
  22. Rosen, B., & Jerdee, T. H. Perceived sex differences in managerially relevant characteristics. Sex Roles, 1978, 4, 837–843.Google Scholar
  23. Schein, V. E. The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973, 57, 95–100.Google Scholar
  24. Sharp, C., & Post, R. Evaluation of male and female applicants for sex-congruent and sex-incongruent jobs. Sex Roles, 1980, 6, 391–401.Google Scholar
  25. Shaw, E. A. Differential impact of negative stereotyping on employee selection. Personnel Psychology, 1972, 25, 333–338.Google Scholar
  26. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 29–39.Google Scholar
  27. Terborg, J. R. Women in management: A research review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 647–664.Google Scholar
  28. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1979.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau, Wage and Labor Standards Administration. Facts about women's absenteeism and labor turnover. Washington, D.C.: Author, 1969.Google Scholar
  30. U.S. Department of Labor, Women's Bureau, Employment Standards and Administration. The myth and the reality (Women's Bureau Report WB 71-113). Washington, D.C.: Author, 1971.Google Scholar
  31. Walster, E., Cleary, T. A., & Clifford, M. M. The effects of race and sex on college admission. Sociology of Education, 1970, 44, 237–244.Google Scholar
  32. Wiener, Y., & Schneiderman, M. L. Use of job information as a criterion in employment decisions of interviewers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, 699–704.Google Scholar
  33. Zikmund, W. G., Hitt, M. A., & Pickens, B. A. Influence of sex and scholastic performance on reactions to job applicant resumes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63, 252–254.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eugenia Proctor Gerdes
    • 1
  • Douglas M. Garber
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyBucknell UniversityLewisburg

Personalised recommendations