When Female Applicants Meet Sexist Interviewers: The Costs of Being a Target of Benevolent Sexism
- 1.7k Downloads
American undergraduate participants (N = 205) read an interview transcript and then evaluated male interviewers and a female job applicant to investigate perceptions of women who receive benevolent or hostile sexism (relative to non-sexist controls). As predicted, positive evaluations of the male interviewer in the benevolent and hostile sexist conditions negatively predicted participants’ hiring decisions—an effect that was fully mediated by low ratings of applicant competence. In accord with ambivalent sexism theory’s claim that women who challenge male dominance are not eligible for protective paternalism, participants’ hostile sexism scores predicted lower ratings of applicant competence and hireability, but only when the interviewer was a benevolent sexist. Implications for workplace discrimination are discussed.
KeywordsAmbivalent sexism Gender attitudes Sex discrimination Employment discrimination
- Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2008). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Vescio, T. K., Gervais, S. J., Snyder, M., & Hoover, A. (2005). Power and the creation of patronizing environments: the stereotype-based behaviors of the powerful and their effects on female performance in masculine domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 658–672.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Weinstock v. Columbia University. (2000). 224 F.3d33 2nd Cir.Google Scholar