Psychological Variables Associated With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in Firefighters: A Systematic Review

Firefighters are repeatedly exposed to work-related potential traumatic events and have an increased risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, the mechanisms implicated in this relationship are not clear. The aim of this study was to analyse the risk and protective factors related to the development of PTSD in firefighters. According to PRISMA, a systematic review of scientific literature was conducted in Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) was used as the methodological quality indicator of the selected articles (PROSPERO reference CRD42020213009). Prognostic studies involving active firefighters with presence of post-traumatic symptomatology, presenting original findings, and written in Spanish or English were included. A total of 1768 potentially eligible articles were identified. According to the inclusion criteria, 87 articles were selected to evaluate the full text. Finally, 19 articles were included, comprising 12,298 active firefighters. There is high heterogeneity in the variables evaluated in the different studies. Taking the data for which this review has found more evidence (moderate support), operational stress, job duration, burnout, expressive suppression and rumination could be risk factors of PTSD, and belongingness and dispositional mindfulness could be protective factors. Other variables with weak support (e.g. resilience) were analysed. This review analyses the available literature, highlighting its scarcity for future research on the subject. Due to repeated trauma exposure, it is important to continue investigations and bear these variables in mind for the prevention of PTSD in firefighters.

Women With Mandarin Accent in the Canadian English-Speaking Hiring Context: Can Evaluations of Warmth Undermine Gender Equity?

Although many workers speak with a non-native English accent, our understanding of this phenomenon is limited because prior work predominantly focused on men. This overlooks whether the biases women experience due to their accent manifests differently. To address this omission, we use an intersectional lens to examine how non-native accents associated with more gender-traditional countries may affect women's hiring outcomes. We argue that the bias women with these accents face is subtle due to an association of non-native (vs. native) accents with perceptions of women's warmth (whereas there are no such effects for men) and consequently higher perceptions of hireability. Yet we posit that the indirect effect on hireability occurs within feminine, but not masculine, industries, which ultimately undermines equity by pushing women with these non-native accents into lower pay and prestige occupations. We found support for our hypotheses in three vignette-based experiments conducted in Canada using a Mandarin accent. Managers and decision-makers need to be aware of the insidious bias women with these non-native accents experience because it may not be immediately apparent that an association of accent with higher ratings of warmth may undermine women at work. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ's website at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/03616843231165475

Which representations of their gender group affect men's orientation towards care? the case of parental leave-taking intentions

Men are currently underrepresented in traditionally female care-oriented (communal) engagement such as taking parental leave, whereas they are overrepresented in traditionally male (agentic) engagement such as breadwinning or leadership. We examined to what extent different prototypical representations of men affect men's self-reported parental leave-taking intentions and more generally the future they can imagine for themselves with regard to work and care roles (i.e., their possible selves). We expected prototypes of men that combine the two basic stereotype dimensions of agency and communion to increase men's communal intentions. In two experiments (N1 = 132, N2 = 233), we presented male participants with contrived newspaper articles that described the ideal man of today with varying degrees of agency and communion (between-subjects design with four conditions; combined agentic and communal vs. agentic vs. communal vs. control condition). Results of Experiment 1 were in line with the main hypothesis that especially presenting a combination of agency and communion increases men's expectations for communal engagement: As compared to a control condition, men expected more to engage in caretaking in the future, reported higher parental leave-taking intentions, and tended to expect taking longer parental leave. Experiment 2 only partially replicated these findings, namely for parental leave-taking intentions. Both experiments additionally provided initial evidence for a contrast effect in that an exclusive focus on agency also increased men's self-reported parental leave-taking intentions compared to the control condition. Yet, exclusively emphasizing communion in prototypes of men did not affect men's communal intentions, which were high to begin with. We further did not find evidence for preregistered mechanisms. We discuss conditions and explanations for the emergence of these mixed effects as well as implications for the communication of gendered norms and barriers to men's communal engagement more broadly.

Going Along to Get Ahead: The Asymmetric Effects of Sexist Joviality on Status Conferral

Social status is highly consequential in organizations but remains elusive for many professional women. Status characteristics theory argues that women are particularly status disadvantaged in masculine organizational cultures. These types of cultures valorize traits and abilities stereotypically associated with men, making it difficult for women in these settings to be seen as skilled and gain status. In the present study, we build and test novel theory explaining when and why masculine organizational cultures create the conditions for some women—those willing and able to skillfully navigate the espoused norms—to disproportionately gain status. We introduce and define the construct of a sexist culture of joviality, a type of masculine organizational culture representing the intersection of sexism and joviality that emerged inductively from our initial qualitative data. A sexist culture of joviality is characterized by norms promoting frequent sexist joking and teasing, along with underlying values and assumptions that support these sexist jovial behaviors. In a longitudinal mixed-methods field study, we demonstrate that participation in a sexist culture of joviality via engagement in sexist jovial norms is positively related to status for women but negatively related to status for men. In a follow-up experiment, we replicate this effect and demonstrate that differential perceptions of social skill mediate this interaction. Our findings illuminate the subtle ways sexism is perpetuated in organizations despite changing societal norms, underscoring the importance of disrupting these dynamics and revealing insights into how to do so.

Welcome to Be Like Us: Expectations of Outgroup Assimilation Shape Dominant Group Resistance to Diversity

We propose a theoretical framework for when and why members of dominant groups experience threat and express intolerant attitudes in response to social change. Scholarship on symbolic threat suggests that the detection of intergroup differences in values and norms is sufficient to elicit negative intergroup attitudes. Building on this theory, we argue that the experience of threat is actually shaped by prospective beliefs about difference (i.e., expectations of whether outgroups will assimilate to ingroup norms over time or not). Across two studies and two accompanying pilots, we show how outgroup assimilation expectation shapes dominant groups' experiences of threat, specifically as it relates to their ability to define the norms of their superordinate category (prototypicality threat). We observe that members of dominant groups are surprisingly tolerant of both social change and intergroup difference in the present, so long as they expect outgroup assimilation in the future.