Abstract
The present research investigated whether evaluations of female and male job candidates rely on different dimensions. Going beyond previous studies on the role of gender stereotypes, we examined the relative importance of competence, morality, and sociability in employment decisions. In Study 1, we content-analyzed 68 archival reports of professionals to explore the extent to which they spontaneously referred to the three dimensions in evaluations of women and men. In Study 2, 259 Italian student participants rated the importance of different traits in hiring a female or male candidate for a job position. Additionally, we tested the relative influence of specific information about candidate competence and morality in predicting hiring (Study 3; n = 123 Italian students) and contract renewal (Study 4; n = 108 Italian students) decisions. Findings consistently showed that competence was the most important dimension in evaluations and decisions concerning male candidates, whereas all dimensions were important for female candidates. Moreover, decisions concerning women were influenced by the dimension on which they appeared to be relatively weak. Overall, findings suggest that women are evaluated against multiple criteria and might therefore be asked to meet more requirements than men to be selected and make a career. These findings can help evaluators and decision makers adopt assessment strategies that prevent more critical evaluations of women, such as establishing specific evaluation criteria before the disclosure of a candidate’s gender.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abele, A. E., Hauke, N., Peters, K., Louvet, E., Szymkow, A., & Duan, Y. (2016). Facets of the fundamental content dimensions: Agency with competence and assertiveness – Communion with warmth and morality. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810.
Baez, S., Flichtentrei, D., Prats, M., Mastandueno, R., Garcia, A. M., Cetkovich, M., … Ibañez, A. (2017). Men, women … who cares? A population-based study on sex differences and gender roles in empathy and moral cognition. PLoSONE, 12(6), e0179336. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179336.
Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The perils of political correctness: Men’s and women’s responses to old-fashioned and modern sexist views. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800106.
Barreto, M., Ryan, M., & Schmitt, M. (2009). The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to gender inequality (pp. 182–303). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323.
Biernat, M., & Fuegen, K. (2001). Shifting standards and the evaluation of competence: Complexity in gender-based judgment and decision-making. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 707–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00237.
Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Gender bias in leader selection? Evidence from a hiring simulation study. Sex Roles, 65, 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0012-7.
Brambilla, M., & Leach, C. W. (2014). On the importance of being moral: The distinctive role of morality in social judgment. Social Cognition, 32, 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2014.32.4.397.
Brambilla, M., Rusconi, P., Sacchi, S., & Cherubini, P. (2011). Looking for honesty: The primary role of morality (vs. sociability and competence) in information gathering. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.744.
Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., Cherubini, P., & Yzerbit, V. Y. (2012). You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02011.x.
Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Menegatti, M., & Moscatelli, S. (2016). Honesty and dishonesty don’t move together: Trait content information influences behavioral synchrony. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 40, 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-016-0229-9.
Bruckmüller, S., Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., & Peters, K. (2013). Ceilings, cliffs, and labyrinths: Exploring metaphors for workplace gender discrimination. In M. K. Ryan & N. R. Branscombe (Eds.), The Sage handbook of gender and psychology (pp. 450–465). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Budig, M. (2002). Male advantage and the gender composition of jobs: Who rides the glass escalator? Social Problems, 49, 258–277. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2002.49.2.258.
Cohen, T. R., Panter, A. T., Turan, N., Morse, L., & Kim, Y. (2014). Moral character in the workplace. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 943–963. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037245.
Crocetti, E., Moscatelli, S., Kaniušonytė, G., Meeus, W., Žukauskienė, R., & Rubini, M. (2019). Developing morality, competence, and sociability in adolescence: A longitudinal study of gender differences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48, 1009–1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-00996-2.
Davison, H. K., & Burke, M. J. (2000). Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1711.
de Oliveira, S. H., Ksenofontov, K., & Becker, J. C. (2015). Explicit but not implicit sexist beliefs predict benevolent and hostile sexist behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 702–715. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2128.
Deszö, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1072–1089. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1955.
Ellemers, N. (2017). Morality and the regulation of social behavior. Milton Park: Routledge.
Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 275–298.
Ellemers, N., & Rink, F. (2016). Diversity in work groups. Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 49–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.06.001.
European Commission. (2018). 2018 report on equality between women and men in the EU. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=50074
Faniko, K., Ellemers, N., Derks, B., & Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (2017). Nothing changes, really: Why women who break through the glass ceiling end up reinforcing it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 638–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217695551.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.
Franke, G. R., Crown, D. F., & Spake, D. F. (1997). Gender differences in ethical perceptions of business practices: A social role theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 920–934. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.920.
Fruhen, L., Watkins, C. D., & Jones, B. C. (2015). Perceptions of facial attractiveness, dominance and trustworthiness predict managerial pay awarded in experimental tasks. Leadership Quarterly, 26, 1005–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.07.001.
Fulton, L., & Sechi, C. (2018). ETUC annual gender equality survey 2018. European Trade Union Institute. Retrieved from https://www.etuc.org/system/files/circular/file/2018-06/ETUC%20Annual%20Gender%20Equality%20Survey%202018.pdf
Geiger, A. W., & Parker, K. (2018, March). For Women’s history month, a look at gender gains – And gaps – In the U.S. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/15/for-womens-history-month-a-look-at-gender-gains-and-gaps-in-the-u-s/
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
Glick, P., Zion, C., & Nelson, C. (1988). What mediates sex discrimination in hiring decisions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.178.
Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J., Abrams, D., Masser, B., … López, W. L. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763.
Gloor, J. L., Li, X., Lim, S., & Feierabend, A. (2018). An inconvenient truth? Interpersonal and career consequences of “maybe baby” expectations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 104, 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.10.001.
Goodwin, G. P., Piazza, J., & Rozin, P. (2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034726.
Gorman, E. H. (2005). Gender stereotypes, same-gender preferences, and organizational variation in the hiring of women: Evidence from law firms. American Sociological Review, 70, 702–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240507000408.
Green, S. B. (1991). How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 499–510. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7.
Handley, I. M., Brown, E. R., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Smith, J. L. (2015). Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder. PNAS, 112, 13201–13206. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1510649112.
Harris, R. J. (1985). A primer of multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Academic Press.
Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003.
Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.416.
Heilman, M. E., Manzi, F., & Braun, S. (2015). Presumed incompetent: Perceived lack of fit and gender bias in recruitment and selection. In A. M. Broadbridge & S. L. Stirling (Eds.), Handbook of gendered careers in management: Getting in, getting on, getting out (pp. 90–104). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Hoever, I. J., van Knippenberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 982–996. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029159.
Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234.
Leach, C. W., Carraro, L., Garcia, R. L., & Kang, J. J. (2017). Morality stereotyping as a basis of women’s in-group favoritism: An implicit approach. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215603462.
Levin, I., Rouwenhorst, R., & Trisko, H. (2005). Separating gender biases in screening and selecting candidates for hiring and firing. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 793–804. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2005.33.8.793.
Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people–things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 996–1009. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.996.
Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1591–1599. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016539.
Manganelli Rattazzi, A. M., Volpato, C., & Canova, L. (2008). L’atteggiamento ambivalente verso donne e uomini. Un contributo alla validazione delle scale ASI e AMI [the ambivalent attitudes towards women and men. A contribution to the validation of ASI and AMI scales]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 35, 217–243. https://doi.org/10.1421.26601.
Menegatti, M., & Rubini, M. (2017). Gender bias and sexism in language. In H. Giles & J. Harwood (Eds.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia, Communication (Vol. 1, pp. 451–468). New York: Oxford University Press.
Menegatti, M., Crocetti, E., & Rubini, M. (2017). Do gender and ethnicity make the difference? Linguistic evaluation bias in primary school. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 36, 415–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X17694980.
Menegatti, M., Moscatelli, S., Brambilla, M., & Sacchi, S. (2019). The honest mirror: Morality as a moderator of spontaneous behavioral mimicry. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Moscatelli, S., Menegatti, M., Albarello, F., Pratto, F., & Rubini, M. (2019). Can we identify with a nation low in morality? The heavy weight of (im) morality in international comparison. Political Psychology, 40, 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12504.
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
Muehlheusser, G., Roider, A., & Wallmeier, N. (2015). Gender differences in honesty: Groups versus individuals. Economics Letters, 128, 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.12.019.
Pagliaro, S., Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., D’Angelo, M., & Ellemers, N. (2013). Initial impressions determine behaviors: Morality predicts the willingness to help newcomers. Journal of Business Ethics, 117, 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1508-y.
Pagliaro, S., Ellemers, N., Barreto, M., & Di Cesare, C. (2016). Once dishonest, always dishonest? The impact of perceived pervasiveness of moral evaluations of the self on motivation to restore a moral reputation. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 586. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00586.
Phelan, J. E., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Rudman, L. A. (2008). Competent yet out in the cold: Shifting criteria for hiring reflect backlash towards agentic women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 406–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00454.x.
Prati, F., Vasiljevic, M., Crisp, R. J., & Rubini, M. (2015). Some extended psychological benefits of challenging social stereotypes: Decreased dehumanization and a reduced reliance on heuristic thinking. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18, 801–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430214567762
Prati, F., Moscatelli, S., Van Lange, P. A. M., Van Doesum, N. J., & Rubini, M. (2018). The central role of morality in perceived humanness and unselfish behaviors. Social Psychology, 49, 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000352.
Prati, F., Menegatti, M., Moscatelli, S., Kana Kenfack, C. S., Pireddu, S., Crocetti, E., Mariani, M. G., & Rubini, M. (2019). Are mixed-gender committees less biased toward female and male candidates? An investigation of competence-, morality-, and sociability-related terms in performance appraisal. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X19844808
Ramos, M. R., Barreto, M., Ellemers, N., Moya, M., & Ferreira, L. (2018). What hostile and benevolent sexism communicate about men’s and women’s warmth and competence. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216656921.
Rubini, M., & Menegatti, M. (2014). Hindering women's careers in academia: Gender linguistic bias in personnel selection. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 632–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X14542436.
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743–762. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00239.
Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008.
Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., Morgenroth, T., Rink, F., Stoker, J., & Peters, K. (2016). Getting on top of the glass cliff: Reviewing a decade of evidence, explanations, and impact. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 446–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.10.008.
Sackett, P. R., & Schmitt, N. (2012). On reconciling conflicting meta-analytic findings regarding integrity test validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 550–556. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028167.
Sheppard, L. D., & Johnson, S. K. (2019). The femme fatale effect: Attractiveness is a liability for businesswomen’s perceived truthfulness, trust, and deservingness of termination. Sex Roles. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01031-1
Uhlmann, E. L., & Cohen, G. L. (2005). Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychological Science, 16, 474–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01559.x.
van den Brink, M., & Benschop, Y. (2011). Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs. Organization, 19, 507–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508411414293.
Williams, C. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39, 253–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096961.
Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impression: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17, 592–598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x.
Wilson Van Voourhis, C. R., & Morgan, B. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.03.2.p043.
Zaikman, Y., & Marks, M. J. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and the sexual double standard. Sex Roles, 71, 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0417-1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moscatelli, S., Menegatti, M., Ellemers, N. et al. Men Should Be Competent, Women Should Have it All: Multiple Criteria in the Evaluation of Female Job Candidates. Sex Roles 83, 269–288 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01111-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01111-2