Despite global gender inequalities, findings on gender differences in subjective well-being have been inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis on gender differences in subjective well-being to account for the type of subjective-well-being measure, sampling variability, and levels of national gender inequality from which samples are gathered. Based on 281 effect sizes for life satisfaction ( N = 1,001,802) and 264 for job satisfaction ( N = 341,949), results showed no significant gender differences in both types of subjective well-being. Supplementary meta-analyses found significantly lower job satisfaction, but not life satisfaction, in women for studies that used both life-satisfaction and job-satisfaction measures, and studies that relied on measures that previously demonstrated measurement equivalence. Using the Gender Inequality Index, we found that greater national gender inequality significantly predicts greater gender differences in job satisfaction, but not life satisfaction. We discuss the implications of these findings and the use of subjective well-being as a measure of societal progress.
To attract a gender diverse workforce, many employers use diversity statements to publicly signal that they value gender diversity. However, this often represents a misalignment between words and actions (i.e., a diversity mixed message) because most organizations are male dominated, especially in board positions. We conducted 3 studies to investigate the potentially indirect effect of such diversity mixed messages through perceived behavioral integrity on employer attractiveness. In Study 1, following a 2 ϫ 2 design, participants (N ϭ 225) were either shown a pro gender diversity statement or a neutral statement, in combination with a gender diverse board (4 men and 4 women) or a uniform all-male board (8 men). Participants' perceived behavioral integrity of the organization was assessed. In Study 2, participants (N ϭ 251) either read positive or negative reviews of the organization's behavioral integrity. Employer attractiveness was then assessed. Study 3 (N ϭ 427) investigated the impact of board gender composition on perceived behavioral integrity and employer attractiveness using a bootstrapping procedure. Both the causal-chain design of Study 1 and 2, as well as the significance test of the proposed indirect relationship in Study 3, revealed that a diversity mixed message negatively affected an organization's perceived behavioral integrity, and low behavioral integrity in turn negatively impacted employer attractiveness. In Study 3, there was also evidence for a tipping point (more than 1 woman on the board was needed) with regard to participants' perceptions of the organization's behavioral integrity.
Sexual harassment awareness training is crucial for both legal defensibility purposes and for creating a psychologically safe environment for employees. Using a pretest/posttest design in an organizational setting, this study examined the simple and interactive effects of two individual perceptions toward the training context-cynicism toward organizational harassment change and perceived unit ethical climate-on posttraining knowledge and myth-based attitudes regarding sexual harassment. With the exception of a marginally significant effect of cynicism on posttraining knowledge, the outcomes were largely unaffected by either of the predictors, individually. However, cynicism toward organizational harassment change and perceived unit ethical climate interacted to predict both outcomes, such that training outcomes particularly suffer when individuals are cynical toward organizational change and perceive the work group as unethical. This underscores the importance of consideration of both organizational and work group levels
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.