Another ceiling? Can males compete for traditionally female jobs? - includes appendix

Journal of Management,  Sept-Oct, 1997  by Leanne E. Atwater,  David D. Van Fleet

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

Top and Mid-level Management Scenarios. In the scenario presented for the Dean's job, the Dean managed a faculty of 85 and a staff of 20, had an annual budget of over 4 million dollars, and was paid a starting salary of $90,000, which was described as "somewhat below average." The Coordinator's job was considered a mid-level management job in which the individual was described as supervising 4 people and managing a budget of $250,000. The $45,000 salary for this position was also described as "somewhat below average." In one condition, the ratios of male and female subordinates to be supervised by the Dean and Coordinator were given.

Experimental Conditions. Subjects ranked one set of applicants for the top-level job and a different set of applicants for the mid-level job in one of three conditions. In all three conditions, the descriptions of the applicants' qualifications were identical. In Condition 1, no names or genders of applicants were provided. Rather, applicants were identified by numbers only. Condition 1 served as a manipulation check and a comparison group. In Condition 2, applicants were identified by names that clearly indicated whether they were male or female. In Condition 3, applicants' names were identified as in Condition 2, and the raters were also told the number of males and females the manager would supervise. All four employees to be supervised in the mid-level, Coordinator position were female, and 100 of the 105 total in the top-level (Dean) position were female.(2)

Hypothetical Job Applicants. Each packet contained a description of four hypothetical job applicants - two males and two females. Included in the description was a subject identifier, which consisted of either a number [in Condition 1] or a name [Conditions 2 and 3]. The names were clearly indicative of gender: Jeff, Cheryl, Greg, and Carol for the Dean; Steve, Sara, Laura and Tim for the Coordinator. The individual's current position was also identified (e.g., Associate Dean for the Dean's job; Social Worker for the Coordinator's job).

In each scenario, one of the males and one of the females was clearly under-qualified relative to the other two. Descriptions of the under-qualified individuals were included as distractions from the purpose of the study. The other (qualified) male and female applicants for each job currently held the same jobs, with the male slightly, but noticeably, more qualified.(3)

The reason for presenting the male as the more qualified applicant for the traditionally female job was to test whether the gender stereotype of the job would take precedence over qualifications in decisions. In other words, we purposely biased the qualifications in favor of the gender opposite to the gender type of the job. A male was the more qualified applicant for both the top-level and mid-level management jobs. In this way, if a female were selected or given a higher salary, it would be clear that the decision was not based on an interpretation of qualifications, but rather in spite of them. In other words, we wanted to test whether a female would be seen as more suited to manage in a stereotypically female job even if she was less qualified than a male.