Organizational commitments to equality change how people view women's and men's professional success

被引:1
作者
Kelley, Kristin [1 ,2 ]
Hipp, Lena [2 ,3 ]
Protsch, Paula [2 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Amer Inst Res, Arlington, VA 22202 USA
[2] WZB Berlin Social Sci Ctr, Berlin, Germany
[3] Univ Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
[4] Univ Cologne, Cologne, Germany
[5] BIBB Fed Inst Vocat Educ & Training, Bonn, Germany
关键词
AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION; GENDER; COMPETENCE; JUSTICE; ATTRIBUTIONS; INEQUALITY; REVOLUTION; ATTITUDES; STIGMA; WOMAN;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-024-56829-1
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
To address women's underrepresentation in high-status positions, many organizations have committed to gender equality. But is women's professional success viewed less positively when organizations commit to women's advancement? Do equality commitments have positive effects on evaluations of successful men? We fielded a survey experiment with a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229) that varied employees' gender and their organization's commitment to equality. Respondents read about a recently promoted employee and rated how decisive of a role they thought intelligence and effort played in getting the employee promoted from 1 "Not at all decisive" to 7 "Very decisive" and the fairness of the promotion from 1 "Very unfair" to 7 "Very fair." When organizations committed to women's advancement rather than uniform performance standards, people believed intelligence and effort were less decisive in women's promotions, but that intelligence was more decisive in men's promotions. People viewed women's promotions as least fair and men's as most fair in organizations committed to women's advancement. However, women's promotions were still viewed more positively than men's in all conditions and on all outcomes, suggesting people believed that organizations had double standards for success that required women to be smarter and work harder to be promoted, especially in organizations that did not make equality commitments.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 55 条
[21]   Reactions to affirmative action: Substance and semantics [J].
Golden, H ;
Hinkle, S ;
Crosby, F .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2001, 31 (01) :73-88
[22]   An attributional theory of motivation [J].
Graham, Sandra .
CONTEMPORARY EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 61
[23]   Understanding attitudes toward affirmative action programs in employment: Summary and meta-analysis of 35 years of research [J].
Harrison, David A. ;
Kravitz, David A. ;
Mayer, David M. ;
Leslie, Lisa M. ;
Lev-Arey, Dalit .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 91 (05) :1013-1036
[24]  
Hegtvedt KA, 2018, CONTEMPORARY SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES, 2 EDITION, P54
[25]   The affirmative action stigma of incompetence: Effects of performance information ambiguity [J].
Heilman, ME ;
Block, CJ ;
Stathatos, P .
ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT JOURNAL, 1997, 40 (03) :603-625
[26]   Disadvantaged by diversity? The effects of diversity goals on competence perceptions [J].
Heilman, ME ;
Welle, B .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 36 (05) :1291-1319
[27]   Type of affirmative action policy: A determinant of reactions to sex-based preferential selection? [J].
Heilman, ME ;
Battle, WS ;
Keller, CE ;
Lee, RA .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 83 (02) :190-205
[28]   PRESUMED INCOMPETENT - STIGMATIZATION AND AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION EFFORTS [J].
HEILMAN, ME ;
LUCAS, JA ;
BLOCK, CJ .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1992, 77 (04) :536-544
[29]   Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder [J].
Heilman, ME .
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ISSUES, 2001, 57 (04) :657-674
[30]   The other side of affirmative action: Reactions of nonbeneficiaries to sex-based preferential selection [J].
Heilman, ME ;
McCullough, WF ;
Gilbert, D .
JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1996, 81 (04) :346-357