Agentic but not warm: Age-gender interactions and the consequences of stereotype incongruity perceptions for middle-aged professional women

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104190
Jennifer A. Chatman , Daron Sharps , Sonya Mishra , Laura J. Kray , Michael S. North
{"title":"Agentic but not warm: Age-gender interactions and the consequences of stereotype incongruity perceptions for middle-aged professional women","authors":"Jennifer A. Chatman ,&nbsp;Daron Sharps ,&nbsp;Sonya Mishra ,&nbsp;Laura J. Kray ,&nbsp;Michael S. North","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We propose that perceptions of professional women change differently than perceptions of men as they age. Drawing inspiration from intersectionality theory, we examine the interaction of age and gender, finding that professional women are seen as more agentic, but also maximally incongruent with the gender-intensified prescription of being communal, in middle age. Our experiment showed that middle-aged women were perceived as agentic, like men, but also as declining more in warmth between young adulthood and middle age. Our field study also showed that middle-aged professional women are viewed as similarly agentic but less warm than men. Our longitudinal within-person study showed that these perceptions have consequences: Unlike men, middle-aged women (professors) received lower performance evaluations compared to their younger selves. Further, a linguistic analysis showed that middle-aged women professors were acknowledged to be more agentic, but also criticized for violating communal stereotype prescriptions, which mediated the link between age and women’s, but not men’s, performance evaluations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 104190"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000796/pdfft?md5=0b186f0ccf06e6001bdf6367f1da44fa&pid=1-s2.0-S0749597822000796-main.pdf","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000796","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

We propose that perceptions of professional women change differently than perceptions of men as they age. Drawing inspiration from intersectionality theory, we examine the interaction of age and gender, finding that professional women are seen as more agentic, but also maximally incongruent with the gender-intensified prescription of being communal, in middle age. Our experiment showed that middle-aged women were perceived as agentic, like men, but also as declining more in warmth between young adulthood and middle age. Our field study also showed that middle-aged professional women are viewed as similarly agentic but less warm than men. Our longitudinal within-person study showed that these perceptions have consequences: Unlike men, middle-aged women (professors) received lower performance evaluations compared to their younger selves. Further, a linguistic analysis showed that middle-aged women professors were acknowledged to be more agentic, but also criticized for violating communal stereotype prescriptions, which mediated the link between age and women’s, but not men’s, performance evaluations.

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
主观但不热情:年龄-性别互动和中年职业女性刻板印象不一致感知的后果
我们认为,随着年龄的增长,人们对职业女性的看法与对男性的看法发生了不同的变化。从交叉性理论中获得灵感,我们研究了年龄和性别的相互作用,发现职业女性在中年时被视为更具能动性,但也与性别强化的公共处方最大程度上不一致。我们的实验表明,人们认为中年女性像男性一样具有能动性,但在青年期和中年期之间,她们的热情程度下降得更多。我们的实地研究还表明,中年职业女性被认为与男性相似,但不那么热情。我们的纵向内部研究表明,这些看法会产生后果:与男性不同,中年女性(教授)得到的绩效评估低于年轻时的自己。此外,一项语言学分析显示,中年女教授被认为更有主见,但也被批评违反了公共刻板印象处方,这种处方调解了年龄与女性(而非男性)绩效评估之间的联系。
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
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context
期刊最新文献
The inclusion of anchors when seeking advice: Causes and consequences Joining disconnected others reduces social identity threat in women brokers Retraction notice to “Don’t stop believing: Rituals improve performance by decreasing anxiety” [Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 137C (2016) 71–85] The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences
×
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