An Evolutionary Explanation for the Female Leadership Paradox

IF 2.4 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution Pub Date : 2021-07-30 DOI:10.3389/fevo.2021.676805
Jennifer E. Smith, Christopher R. von Rueden, M. van Vugt, C. Fichtel, P. Kappeler
{"title":"An Evolutionary Explanation for the Female Leadership Paradox","authors":"Jennifer E. Smith, Christopher R. von Rueden, M. van Vugt, C. Fichtel, P. Kappeler","doi":"10.3389/fevo.2021.676805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social influence is distributed unequally between males and females in many mammalian societies. In human societies, gender inequality is particularly evident in access to leadership positions. Understanding why women historically and cross-culturally have tended to be under-represented as leaders within human groups and organizations represents a paradox because we lack evidence that women leaders consistently perform worse than men. We also know that women exercise overt influence in collective group-decisions within small-scale human societies, and that female leadership is pervasive in particular contexts across non-human mammalian societies. Here, we offer a transdisciplinary perspective on this female leadership paradox. Synthesis of social science and biological literatures suggests that females and males, on average, differ in why and how they compete for access to political leadership in mixed-gender groups. These differences are influenced by sexual selection and are moderated by socioecological variation across development and, particularly in human societies, by culturally transmitted norms and institutions. The interplay of these forces contributes to the emergence of female leaders within and across species. Furthermore, females may regularly exercise influence on group decisions in less conspicuous ways and different domains than males, and these underappreciated forms of leadership require more study. We offer a comprehensive framework for studying inequality between females and males in access to leadership positions, and we discuss the implications of this approach for understanding the female leadership paradox and for redressing gender inequality in leadership in humans.","PeriodicalId":12367,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.676805","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Social influence is distributed unequally between males and females in many mammalian societies. In human societies, gender inequality is particularly evident in access to leadership positions. Understanding why women historically and cross-culturally have tended to be under-represented as leaders within human groups and organizations represents a paradox because we lack evidence that women leaders consistently perform worse than men. We also know that women exercise overt influence in collective group-decisions within small-scale human societies, and that female leadership is pervasive in particular contexts across non-human mammalian societies. Here, we offer a transdisciplinary perspective on this female leadership paradox. Synthesis of social science and biological literatures suggests that females and males, on average, differ in why and how they compete for access to political leadership in mixed-gender groups. These differences are influenced by sexual selection and are moderated by socioecological variation across development and, particularly in human societies, by culturally transmitted norms and institutions. The interplay of these forces contributes to the emergence of female leaders within and across species. Furthermore, females may regularly exercise influence on group decisions in less conspicuous ways and different domains than males, and these underappreciated forms of leadership require more study. We offer a comprehensive framework for studying inequality between females and males in access to leadership positions, and we discuss the implications of this approach for understanding the female leadership paradox and for redressing gender inequality in leadership in humans.
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
女性领导悖论的进化解释
在许多哺乳动物社会中,社会影响力在雄性和雌性之间分布不均。在人类社会中,性别不平等在获得领导职位方面尤为明显。理解为什么历史上和跨文化的女性在人类群体和组织中作为领导者的代表性往往不足,这是一个悖论,因为我们缺乏证据表明女性领导者的表现一直比男性差。我们还知道,在小规模的人类社会中,女性在集体决策中发挥着明显的影响力,而女性领导在非人类哺乳动物社会的特定环境中无处不在。在这里,我们提供了一个跨学科的视角来看待这种女性领导悖论。综合社会科学和生物学文献表明,女性和男性在男女混合群体中争夺政治领导权的原因和方式上平均存在差异。这些差异受到性别选择的影响,并受到整个发展过程中的社会生态变化的调节,特别是在人类社会中,受到文化传播的规范和制度的调节。这些力量的相互作用促成了物种内部和跨物种女性领导者的出现。此外,与男性相比,女性可能会经常以不那么显眼的方式和不同的领域对群体决策施加影响,而这些被低估的领导形式需要更多的研究。我们为研究女性和男性在获得领导职位方面的不平等提供了一个全面的框架,并讨论了这种方法对理解女性领导悖论和纠正人类领导中的性别不平等的影响。
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
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution Environmental Science-Ecology
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
1143
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research across fundamental and applied sciences, to provide ecological and evolutionary insights into our natural and anthropogenic world, and how it should best be managed. Field Chief Editor Mark A. Elgar at the University of Melbourne is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics and the public worldwide. Eminent biologist and theist Theodosius Dobzhansky’s astute observation that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” has arguably even broader relevance now than when it was first penned in The American Biology Teacher in 1973. One could similarly argue that not much in evolution makes sense without recourse to ecological concepts: understanding diversity — from microbial adaptations to species assemblages — requires insights from both ecological and evolutionary disciplines. Nowadays, technological developments from other fields allow us to address unprecedented ecological and evolutionary questions of astonishing detail, impressive breadth and compelling inference. The specialty sections of Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution will publish, under a single platform, contemporary, rigorous research, reviews, opinions, and commentaries that cover the spectrum of ecological and evolutionary inquiry, both fundamental and applied. Articles are peer-reviewed according to the Frontiers review guidelines, which evaluate manuscripts on objective editorial criteria. Through this unique, Frontiers platform for open-access publishing and research networking, Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution aims to provide colleagues and the broader community with ecological and evolutionary insights into our natural and anthropogenic world, and how it might best be managed.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of mangrove structures and biomass on islands along the Java Sea: a case study on Bawean Islands and Karimunjawa Islands Amphibian diversity across an urban gradient in southern South America Seasonal somatic reserves of a northern ungulate influenced by reproduction and a fire-mediated landscape Assessment of microphytobenthos communities in the Kinzig catchment using photosynthesis-related traits, digital light microscopy and 18S-V9 amplicon sequencing Comprehensive survey of Early to Middle Triassic Gondwanan floras reveals under-representation of plant–arthropod interactions
×
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