Gender and social influence: A social psychological analysis.

Eagly, Alice H.

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.38.9.971

Cited by 364 publications

(244 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

219

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In relation to homemaker and employee roles, for example, one may wonder whether girls are socialized to acquire communal traits and boys to acquire agentic traits, with the result that women as a group are more suited to perceivers' concept of the homemaker role and men as a group to perceivers' concept of the employee role. Although we believe that socializing agents tend to prepare girls and boys for the social roles that they believe these girls and boys will probably occupy as adults (Eagly, 1983), our theory of stereotypes does' not address these issues of how people are prepared for roles and recruited into them. According to our framework, the proximal cause of gender stereotypes is the differing distributions of women and men into social roles, whatever the causation that lies behind these differing distributions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles.

Eagly

Steffen²

1984

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

1,481

1,100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to stereotypic beliefs about the sexes, women are more communal (selfless and concerned with others) and less agentic (self-assertive and motivated to master) than men. These beliefs were hypothesized to stem from perceivers' observations of women and men in differing social roles: (a) Women are more likely than men to hold positions of lower status and authority, and (b) women are more likely than men to be homemakers and are less likely to be employed in the paid work force. Experiments 1 and 2 failed to support the hypothesis that observed sex differences in status underlie belief in female communal qualities and male agentic qualities. Experiment 3 supported the hypothesis that observed sex differences in distribution into homemaker and employee occupational roles account for these beliefs. In this experiment, subjects perceived the average woman and man stereotypically. Female and male homemakers were perceived as high in communion and low in agency. Female and male employees were perceived as low in communion and high in agency, although female employees were perceived as even more agentic than their male counterparts. Experiments 4 and 5 examined perceptions that might account for the belief that employed women are especially agentic: (a) A double burden of employment plus family responsibilities did not account for this belief, and (b) freedom of choice about being employed accounted for it reasonably well.Gender stereotypes, like other social stereotypes, reflect perceivers' observations of what people do in daily life. If perceivers often observe a particular group of people engaging in a particular activity, they are likely to believe that the abilities and personality attributes required to carry out that activity are typical of that group of people. For example, if perceivers consistently observe women caring for chil-

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles.

Eagly

Steffen²

1984

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Self Cite

1,481

1,100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Later in life, status issues further perpetuate the early socialization differences in the value of work conducted by men and women. Women and men are distributed differently into social roles; men tend to occupy higher status roles, and women occupy lower status roles (Eagly, 1983(Eagly, , 1987Eagly & Steffen, 1984). Female-typed occupations generally have had less prestige, less power, and less pay than male-typed occupations (Dexter, 1985).…”

Section: Gender and Compensationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does whom you work with matter? Effects of referent group gender and age composition on managers' compensation.

Ostroff

Atwater

2003

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much research has examined gender and age effects on compensation, concluding that a wage gap exists favoring men and negative stereotypes against older workers persist. Although the effect of an employee's gender or age has been widely studied, little work has examined the impact of the demographic characteristics of a focal employee's immediate referent groups (e.g., subordinates, peers, or supervisors) on pay. The effect of the gender and age composition of a focal manager's subordinates, peers, and supervisor on the manager's compensation levels was investigated in a sample of 2,178 managers across a wide range of organizations and functional areas. After controlling for a number of human capital variables, results indicated that not only does a wage gap favoring men exist, but also managerial pay is lower when managers' referent groups are largely female, when subordinates are outside the prime age group, and when peers and supervisors are younger.

show abstract

“…To complement the understanding of gender differences in aggression, future studies also should examine gender differences in the use of indirect types of aggression (Bjorkqvist, Osterman, & Kaukiainen, 1992). Deaux (1984) and Eagly (1983) have also argued that natural settings typically offer more behavioral choices than do laboratory settings. Consequently, the results from experimental studies of aggression may reflect aggressiveness that is found only when other behavioral choices are unavailable.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis.

Bettencourt¹,

Miller²

1996

Psychological Bulletin

719

542

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we meta-analytically examine experimental studies to assess the moderating effect of provocation on gender differences in aggression. Convergent evidence shows that, whereas unprovoked men are more aggressive than women, provocation markedly attenuates this gender difference. Gender differences in appraisals of provocation intensity and fear of danger from retaliation (but not negative affect) partially mediate the attenuating effect of provocation. However, they do not entirely account for its manipulated effect. Type of provocation and other contextual variables also affect the magnitude of gender differences in aggression. The results support a social role analysis of gender differences in aggression and counter A. H. Eagly and V. Steffen's (1986) meta-analytic inability to confirm an attenuating effect of provocation on gender differences in aggression.Many experimental studies of adult aggression show that men are more aggressive than women (for reviews, see Eagly & Steffen, 1986;Frodi, Macaulay, & Thome, 1977;Hyde, 1984;and White, 1983). Earlier literature reviews (e.g., Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974;Terman& Tyler, 1954) tend to emphasize biological contributions to this difference more strongly than do later ones (e.g., Eagly & Steffen, 1986;Frodi et al, 1977;Hyde, 1984), and in more recent reviews, some scholars seriously question whether biology plays an important role in human aggression (e.g., Adams, 1992;Benton, 1992). Whatever role biological factors play, contemporary theorists argue that gender roles and cultural norms contribute to gender differences in aggression (e.g., Bandura, 1973;B. A. Baron & Richardson, 1994;Berkowitz, 1989;Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, & Sears, 1939;Eagly & Steffen, 1986;Lightdale & Prentice, 1994;Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974;Zillman, 1979). In their meta-analysis A preliminary report of this research was presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, May 1993. Partial support of the preparation of this article was provided by an American Psychological Asssociation Minority Fellowship and by the Center for Research in Social Behavior at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Preparation of this article was also facilitated by National Science Foundation Grants BSN-8719439 and SBR 9319752.We thank Lisa Allard, Mathew Fink, Alan Kelly, and Andrea Mandeiblatt for their assistance in providing the judgments of key theoretical variables on the basis of the excerpted materials from the method sections; Kristina Bowman for her assistance in coding the categorical variables; and Stephanie Black for her assistance in conducting the computer literature searches. We also thank Li-Fei Wang for providing calculations of the effect size estimates. Finally, we thank

show abstract

Gender and social influence: A social psychological analysis.

Cited by 364 publications

References 68 publications

Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles.

Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles.

Does whom you work with matter? Effects of referent group gender and age composition on managers' compensation.

Gender differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About