Competence and confusion: How stereotype threat can make you a bad judge of your competence

Discrimination Based on Physical Attractiveness: Causes and Consequences A Critical Perspective

The consequences of physical attractiveness (PA) are ubiquitous, however not often become a topic of discussion. The consequences, in general, are attributed to preference or discrimination without much deliberation. There is a very thin line between the two. The study makes an attempt to distinguish between preference and discrimination based on PA. In an organizational context, this distinction seems warranted since PA does impact work-related outcomes. The distinction was addressed by examining published studies between 1970 and 2021 on PA in the management and economics field of research. The study highlights when and how preference turns into discrimination and furthers discusses the causes of such discrimination. The causes are equivalent to antecedents; the antecedent to being physically attractive is mostly genes. The antecedents to the discrimination are the attributions that we have associated with being physically attractive. The study highlights these attributions and the reasons for these attributions. To completely understand a phenomenon, it is essential to understand what causes it. Therefore, this study tries to understand what causes discrimination based on PA. The study has implications for diversity and inclusion literature and practice. It also adds to the literature on PA.

Women rate the competence of their occupational role higher than men do: Evidence from two different samples

Gender stereotypes play a potent role in how the work of men and women is perceived and valued. Stereotypes also influence the way people look upon themselves. In the present research, two studies are reported where men and women at work rated the degree of warmth and competence of a person with their own occupation, and how they think people in general would perceive a person in the same occupation. A wider gap between own perceptions and that of people in general was expected for women than for men, as it was assumed that the view of other people’s perceptions would serve as a proxy for stereotype threat for women. Study 1 comprised 449 participants (74 % women) working within the public sector, mainly in social, caring, and education professions, and Study 2 comprised a convenience sample of 189 participants (70 % women) from a variety of sectors and professions. Both studies yielded consistent results; contradictory to what was expected, men and women did not differ in terms of how they thought people in general would perceive the competence of their occupation, instead women rated the competence of their own occupation higher than men did, even after controlling for type of occupation and educational level. Warmth displayed only minor gender differences. The results are discussed in relation to research on counter-reactions against stereotype threat, how the concept of competence could be understood, as well as other possible explanations of the unexpected results.

Communicating Gender-Equality Progress, Reduces Social Identity Threats for Women Considering a Research Career

Since the majority of top-level researchers are men, how does this vertical gender-segregation affect students’ perceptions of a research career? In the current study, an experimental manipulation either reminded students of academia’s current dominance of men or of its improving gender-balance. The results showed that women primed with the dominance of men anticipated much higher social identity threats (e.g., fear of discrimination) in a future research career as compared to a control group. In contrast, women primed with the improving gender-balance anticipated much lower threat. Further, the dominance of men prime increased men’s interest in the PhD program, as compared to controls. Women’s interest was unaffected by the prime, but their lower interest as compared to men’s across conditions was mediated by their lower research self-efficacy (i.e., competence beliefs). The results imply that communicating gender-equality progress may allow women to consider a career in research without the barrier of social identity threat.