Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?

IF 2.8 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL European Journal of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1002/ejsp.3109
Mona Salwender, Dagmar Stahlberg
{"title":"Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?","authors":"Mona Salwender, Dagmar Stahlberg","doi":"10.1002/ejsp.3109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We tested the popular claim that women only apply for jobs when they are 100% qualified, whereas men apply already with as little as a 60% qualification fit. In Study 1, we presented a job advertisement and a CV with different levels of qualification fit. Participants were asked to imagine that the presented CV was their own and to indicate whether they would apply for the advertised job. No gender difference emerged in participants’ application intentions, neither at 60% nor at 100% qualification fit. To enhance personal involvement, in Studies 2–4 we presented a job advertisement and asked participants to indicate whether they themselves would apply for the advertised job. Afterwards, participants indicated for every qualification criterion listed in the job advertisement whether they fulfilled it or not. We found a significant, but not robust gender difference in the predicted direction in the relationship between application intention and qualification fit. In addition, when asking how much women and men wanted to be prepared in application situations, women robustly indicated a higher desire for preparedness than men. Overall, our results indicate that for women psychological hurdles (i.e., desire for preparedness, fears and other gender‐relevant indicators assessed) are higher in application situations than for men. However, these do not seem to translate reliably into differential application intentions in the experimental paradigms used in our studies. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings.","PeriodicalId":48377,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.3109","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We tested the popular claim that women only apply for jobs when they are 100% qualified, whereas men apply already with as little as a 60% qualification fit. In Study 1, we presented a job advertisement and a CV with different levels of qualification fit. Participants were asked to imagine that the presented CV was their own and to indicate whether they would apply for the advertised job. No gender difference emerged in participants’ application intentions, neither at 60% nor at 100% qualification fit. To enhance personal involvement, in Studies 2–4 we presented a job advertisement and asked participants to indicate whether they themselves would apply for the advertised job. Afterwards, participants indicated for every qualification criterion listed in the job advertisement whether they fulfilled it or not. We found a significant, but not robust gender difference in the predicted direction in the relationship between application intention and qualification fit. In addition, when asking how much women and men wanted to be prepared in application situations, women robustly indicated a higher desire for preparedness than men. Overall, our results indicate that for women psychological hurdles (i.e., desire for preparedness, fears and other gender‐relevant indicators assessed) are higher in application situations than for men. However, these do not seem to translate reliably into differential application intentions in the experimental paradigms used in our studies. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
女性是否只有在 100% 合格时才申请,而男性在 60% 合格时就已经申请了?
我们对一种流行的说法进行了测试,即女性只有在100%符合条件时才会申请工作,而男性只需符合60%的条件即可申请工作。在研究 1 中,我们展示了一则招聘广告和一份不同学历匹配度的简历。参与者被要求想象所展示的简历就是他们自己的简历,并表明他们是否会申请广告中的工作。无论是 60% 还是 100% 的学历契合度,参与者的求职意向都没有出现性别差异。为了加强个人参与,在研究 2-4 中,我们展示了一则招聘广告,并要求参与者表明自己是否会申请广告中的工作。之后,受试者针对招聘广告中列出的每项资格标准指出自己是否符合这些标准。我们发现,在求职意向与学历匹配度之间的关系中,性别差异在预测方向上有明显的差异,但并不稳固。此外,当问及女性和男性希望在应聘中做好准备的程度时,女性比男性更强烈地表示希望做好准备。总之,我们的研究结果表明,女性在申请过程中遇到的心理障碍(即希望做好准备、恐惧和其他与性别相关的评估指标)高于男性。然而,在我们的研究中使用的实验范式中,这些似乎并没有可靠地转化为不同的申请意向。我们将讨论研究结果的理论和实践意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
84
期刊介绍: Topics covered include, among others, intergroup relations, group processes, social cognition, attitudes, social influence and persuasion, self and identity, verbal and nonverbal communication, language and thought, affect and emotion, embodied and situated cognition and individual differences of social-psychological relevance. Together with original research articles, the European Journal of Social Psychology"s innovative and inclusive style is reflected in the variety of articles published: Research Article: Original articles that provide a significant contribution to the understanding of social phenomena, up to a maximum of 12,000 words in length.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information ‘(N)One of us but all of them!’ Ingroup favouritism on individual and group levels in the context of deviant behaviour Never again: Lessons of genocide in survivor testimonies from the Holocaust, Nanjing massacre and Rwandan genocide Age of the examiner and older people's memory performances: A test of the stereotype threat theory using variations on negative age stereotypes across 18 European countries Do women only apply when they are 100% qualified, whereas men already apply when they are 60% qualified?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1