European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · 2015 · 137 citations · 48 references
Social SciencesLeadershipOrganizational BehaviorGenderJob DesignSociolinguisticsGender BiasGender StereotypesImpression FormationJob EvaluationSociolinguistic VariationWorkplace AttitudesGender Stereotype RepresentationGender Stereotypes In LeadershipGendered Leadership PerceptionsGendered Lexical VariationJob Advertisements AnalysisLeadership StatusLinguistic StructurePosition
Linguistic forms which refer to individuals impact mental representations of these individuals: When masculine generics are used, women tend to be cognitively underrepresented, whereas feminine–masculine word pairs are associated with a higher cognitive inclusion of women. The present research investigates whether linguistic forms affect women’s perceived lack of fit with leadership positions, which is particularly pronounced for high-status leadership positions. In a hiring-simulation experiment (N = 363), we tested the effects of different linguistic forms used in German-language job advertisements: (1) masculine forms (e.g., Geschäftsführer, ‘CEO, masc.’); (2) masculine forms with (m/f) (e.g., Geschäftsführer (m/w), ‘CEO, masc. (m/f)’); and (3) word pairs (e.g., Geschäftsführerin/Geschäftsführer, ‘CEO, fem./CEO, masc.’). The job ads announced either a high- or low-status leadership position. Results showed that female applicants were perceived to fit less well with the high-status position than male applicants when either the masculine or the masculine form with (m/f) was used––even though they were perceived to be equally competent. However, female and male applicants were perceived as fitting the high-status leadership position similarly well when word pairs were used.
48
Jacob Cohen · Psychological Bulletin · 1992 · 42.2K citations
J. Scott Armstrong, David M. Georgoff · International Journal of Forecasting · 1988 · 18.2K citations