Gender Stereotypes Influence How People Explain Gender Disparities in the Workplace
Gender stereotypes provide viable explanations for why women are underrepresented and men are overrepresented in senior leadership positions and STEM occupations, typically by attributing gender disparities to the dispositions of women and men. The present research examined whether stereotypes also influence attributions to discrimination. Consistent with predictions, undergraduate participants who strongly vs. weakly endorsed gender stereotypes, either chronically (Study 1, N = 147) or when situationally primed (Study 2, N = 258), were less likely to attribute gender disparities in the workplace to discrimination. In addition, participants unexpectedly made stronger discrimination attributions when explaining gender gaps in leadership positions than in STEM occupations, suggesting that interventions for addressing gender discrimination may need to use different strategies for different contexts. Overall, results are consistent with the notion that stereotypes influence explanations for group disparities in ways that justify existing social arrangements as fair, just, and legitimate. Our findings have implications for understanding when people will acknowledge discrimination, which is an important first step toward addressing discrimination.
KeywordsStereotyped attitudes Sex role attitudes Attribution Division of labor Sex discrimination
- Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Biernat, M., Crosby, F.J., & Williams, J.C. (Eds.). (2004). The maternal wall: Research and policy perspectives on discrimination against mothers in the workplace [Special issue]. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4).Google Scholar
- Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis/Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Dweck, C.S. (2012). Implicit theories. In P. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, E. T. Higgins, P. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (vol. 2, pp. 43–61). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. doi: 10.4135/9781446249222.n28.
- Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
- Fouad, N.A., Singh, R., Fitzpatrick, M. E., & Liu, J.P. (2012). Stemming the tide: Why women leave engineering. Retrieved from http://www.studyofwork.com/files/2012/10/NSF_Report_2012-101d98c.pdf.
- Gilbert, D. T. (1989). Thinking lightly about others: Automatic components of the social inference process. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 189–211). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Harrison, D. A., Kravitz, D. A., Mayer, D. M., Leslie, L. M., & Lev-Arey, D. (2006). Understanding attitudes toward affirmative action programs in employment: Summary and meta-analysis of 35 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1013–1036. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortion in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (vol. 10, pp. 174–221). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Ross, L. D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2015). Employed labor force statistics from the Current Population Survey. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm.
- U.S. Department of Labor & Bureau of Labor Statistics (2008). Women in the labor force: A databook (Report No. 996). Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook2008.htm.
- U.S. Glass Ceiling Commission (1995). Good for business: Making full use of the nation’s human capital. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.witi.com/research/downloads/glassceiling.pdf.
- Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Vescio, T. K., Gervais, S. J., & Cundiff, J. L. (2016). Powerful women and men’s stereotyping of the self and others in masculine domains. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
- Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Yoshida, E., Peach, J. M., Zanna, M. P., & Spencer, S. J. (2012). Not all automatic associations are created equal: How implicit normative evaluations are distinct from implicit attitudes and uniquely predict meaningful behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 694–706. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.09.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Yzerbyt, V., & Rogier, A. (2001). Blame it on the group: Entitativity, subjective essentialism, and social attribution. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 103–134). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Yzerbyt, V., & Rogier, A. (2002). Subjective essentialism and the emergence of stereotypes. In C. McGarty, V. Y. Yzerbyt, & R. Spears (Eds.), Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups (pp. 38–66). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Yzerbyt, V., Rocher, S., & Schadron, G. (1997). Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialistic view of group perception. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The social psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 20–50). Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar