Ambivalent Sexism and Applicant Evaluations: Effects on Ambiguous Applicants

Abstract

The purpose of the current research was to evaluate how gender stereotypes and sexist attitudes affect responses to hypothetical job applicants. In Study 1 (N=93) undergraduate and graduate students in the Southwestern USA evaluated a male, female, or gender-ambiguous resume. They also completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick and Fiske 1996). Hypotheses were tested using ANOVA. Results suggested that participants who expressed more hostile sexist attitudes evaluated the gender-ambiguous applicant more negatively than a male or female applicant. In Study 2 (N=117), graduate and undergraduate participants were asked to indicate the gender of the ambiguous applicant. Those who scored high on hostile sexism, and perceived a gender-ambiguous applicant to be male, provided the most favorable evaluations.

Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful: Acknowledging appearance mitigates the “beauty is beastly” effect

“…Relatively few studies have demonstrated that overtly held sexist beliefs influence applicant evaluations (Salvaggio et al, 2009). Thus, our findings not only add to the literature on the beauty is beastly effect, but also add to research on sexism by demonstrating how hostile sexism impacts evaluations of attractive women applying for traditionally masculine jobs.…”

“…That is not to say, however, that benevolent sexism does not influence perceptions of women because benevolent sexism enhanced the evaluation of an attractive female applicant in the acknowledgment condition. The duality of wanting to support women while trying to protect them may lead to null effects of benevolent sexism on evaluations of women in employment situations (Masser & Abrams, 2004;Salvaggio et al, 2009). Yet, acknowledging that one's appearance is atypical for the job at hand may signal that the applicant is confident and capable (Hebl, Tickle, & Heatherton, 2000).…”

“…Despite the extensive literature on sex discrimination, relatively few studies have shown that overtly held sexist beliefs influence applicant evaluations (Salvaggio, Streich, & Hopper, 2009). There is some support for the idea that sexist individuals discriminate against women applying for masculine sex-typed jobs (King & King, 1983), but these findings have not been extended to the beauty is beastly effect.…”

“…The duality of wanting to support women while also trying to protect them may lead to null effects of benevolent sexism on evaluations of women in employment situations (Masser & Abrams, 2004;Salvaggio et al, 2009). The support component should result in positive evaluations of women, but the desire to protect woman from the challenges of a masculine sex-typed job might temper those positive feelings.…”

Another Test of Gender Differences in Assignments to Precarious Leadership Positions: Examining the Moderating Role of Ambivalent Sexism

“…In the work environment, the willingness to endorse attitudes that are consistent with gender stereotypes, rather than activation of the stereotype itself, may be predictive of evaluations of women (Salvaggio, Streich, & Hopper, ). One way to assess the endorsement of gender stereotypes is by explicitly measuring sexist attitudes.…”