In two experiments, we examined how men respond to women who either challenge or legitimize societal gender inequality, and how gender identification moderates these responses. We hypothesized that men feel less threatened by women who legitimize (vs. challenge) the gender hierarchy, and evaluate these women more positively. To investigate these expectations, we assessed self-reports (Studies 1 and 2) and cardiovascular threat/challenge responses (Study 2). Both studies showed that men experience less negative emotions when presented with a woman who legitimized (vs. challenged) the gender hierarchy. Moreover, among men with a relatively high gender identification, a woman who challenged the gender hierarchy elicited a physiological response pattern indicative of threat, whereas a woman who legitimized the gender hierarchy elicited a pattern indicative of challenge. Results are discussed in terms of social identity theory, status threat, and self-distancing behavior.

The very early perceptional processes that underlie social categorization can be detected with event-related brain potentials (ERPs). Using this methodology, the present work aims to detect differential attentional processing of ingroup and outgroup members based on gender categories. Specifically, three EEG studies tested how factors that enhance social identity relevance, namely gender identification and contextual salience of gender representation, moderate neural gender categorization effects. Study 1 showed that both women (Study 1a) and men (Study 1b) were more likely to show preferential attention to ingroup over outgroup members, but only when they identified strongly with their gender group. Study 2 showed that when gender categories in an intergroup leadership context were made salient (i.e., when women were numerically underrepresented versus equally represented compared to men), women, irrespective of their level of gender identification, showed preferential attention to ingroup over outgroup members. Together, this work provides empirical evidence for (1) the neural gender categorization effect among both men and women as soon as 100 ms after face perception and (2) the moderating role of factors that enhance social identity relevance in early gender categorization.

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic drastically changed the circumstances for parents to combine work and care. We examined work-family guilt among working parents in the Netherlands during the first year of the COVID-19-pandemic (2020). In a cross-sectional survey study with two time points (March and December 2020) in a sample of working parents (N = 574) in the Netherlands, we revealed three key findings. (1) On average, mothers experienced more guilt towards their family for time and energy invested in work instead of family (work-family guilt) than fathers. (2) Parents with essential occupations (regardless of gender) reported significantly stronger experiences of work-family guilt during the first year of the pandemic compared to parents with non-essential occupations. (3) Parents who experienced stronger work-family guilt were more likely to compensate for their guilt by prioritizing family over work and self (by foregoing their leisure time or intending to reduce workhours in order to be with their family). Together these findings show that in terms of combining work and family, the situation is clearly harder on some more than others, namely mothers and essential workers. These findings demonstrate the gendered experience of work-family guilt and the asymmetrical impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the work-family experiences of parents.

No abstract