Everybody but Me: Pluralistic Ignorance and the Masculinity Contest

Abstract

The masculinity contest is a set of organizational norms that fosters competition, work devotion, strength, and dominance. Here, we explore pluralistic ignorance as a mechanism by which these norms persist. Pluralistic ignorance occurs when individuals privately reject a norm, but mistakenly believe others endorse it. This then discourages individuals from criticizing norms that perpetuate unpopular behavioral standards. Drawing on data from U.S. workers, we find masculinity contest norms are prone to pluralistic ignorance. Workers believe their coworkers’ endorsement of these norms exceeds their own private endorsement, although pluralistic ignorance levels differ by workers’ gender, parental status, and the sex composition of their job. Further, employees’ pluralistic ignorance about masculinity contest norms predicts decreased job satisfaction and engagement, decreased mental health, and increased relationship conflict. Discussion considers the implications of these findings for policies that may bring organizational norms into alignment with workers’ ideals.

Work as a Masculinity Contest

“…Munsch et al. () showed that the negative consequences of MCCs may be heightened for those who see MCC norms as incompatible with their own ideals about how organizations should function, but who believe (falsely) that their coworkers view MCC norms as ideal (a form of pluralistic ignorance). Specifically, Munsch et al.…”

“…In their survey of U.S. workers, Munsch et al. () found that few respondents personally endorsed masculinity contest norms as an “ideal work environment,” but often believed that coworkers subscribed to these norms. In other words, respondents falsely believed that coworkers approve MCC norms, creating a situation likely to foster MCC norms’ persistence.…”

“…Additionally, Munsch et al. () showed that workers in jobs with a higher percentage of men experienced greater pluralistic ignorance: They were more likely to believe that their coworkers endorsed MCC norms much more than they themselves did.…”

“…It examines how even when “what it takes to succeed” in most workplaces may appear neutral on the surface, these values may in actuality engage gender identities so that “real men” are the ones most likely to thrive. In this article, we conceptualized MCCs in organizations, and the following papers develop and validate a measure to study them (Glick et al., ), examine some of their consequences (Alonso, ; Glick et al., ; Matos et al., ; Rawski & Workman‐Stark, ), explain why they persist (Kuchynka et al, ; Munsch et al., ), show how MCCs may vary by occupation (Reid et al., ), and discuss what might be done to address or change them (Ely & Kimmel, ; Rawski & Workman‐Stark, ).…”

“…This introductory article outlines a theoretical framework for thinking about MCCs. Subsequent papers in this special issue represent initial studies into measuring MCCs (Glick et al., ), assessing their consequences (Alonso, ; Glick et al., ; Matos, O'Neill, and Lei, ; Reid, O'Neill & Blair‐Loy, ; Rawski & Workman‐Stark, ), analyzing their ideological underpinnings (Kuchynka, Bosson, Vandello, & Puryear, ; Munsch, Weaver, Bosson, & O'Connor, ), and considering potential interventions (Ely & Kimmel, ; Rawski & Workman‐Stark, ).…”