Gender Gaps in Sociopolitical Attitudes: A Social Psychological Analysis.

Abstract

This research examined the proposition that differential role occupancy by women and men fosters gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes. Analyses of the General Social Survey (J. A. Davis & T. W. Smith, 1998) and a community sample showed that women, more than men, endorsed policies that are socially compassionate, traditionally moral, and supportive of equal rights for women and for gays and lesbians. To clarify the sources of these gaps, the research examined (a) similarities between gender gaps and gaps associated with other respondent attributes such as race and parenthood, (b) interactions between respondent sex and other attributes, (c) the temporal patterning of gender gaps, and (d) the mediation of attitudinal gender gaps by 3 ideological variables--commitment to equality, group-based dominance, and conservatism versus liberalism.

Women directors' contribution to board decision‐making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception

“…Research suggests that women have less tolerance for ethical lapses and endorsement of morally non-traditional social policies (Eagly et al, 2004) and are more likely to perceive specific business practices as unethical (Franke et al, 1997). Whereas we do not test for associations between particular women values and specific board practices, we find that when women possess different values than male directors they are likely to be more active and influential in the boardroom by having an impact not only specific board decisions but also the range of issues to be discussed, which in turn influence the board's evaluation of firm organization, HR and CSR.…”

“…Research has shown that men and women differ ideologically, especially in terms of women's greater compassion (Beutel and Marini, 1995) and men's greater tolerance for ethical lapses and endorsement of morally non-traditional social policies (Eagly et al, 2004). A metaanalysis by Franke et al (1997) revealed that men were less likely to perceive specific business practices, such as insider trading, as unethical.…”

Social Dominance Orientation

“…The SDO-E dimension, or some variant of it, accounts for variance in conservatism, opposition to international diplomacy, anti-Black attitudes (not including old-fashioned racism), just world beliefs, and opposition to redistributive social policies (Cohrs, Moschner, Maes, & Kielmann, 2005;Eagly, Diekman, Johannesen-Schmidt, & Koenig, 2004;Freeman, Aquino, & McFerran, 2009;Jost & Thompson, 2000;Reyna, Henry, Korfmacher, & Tucker, 2006;Kugler, Cooper, & Nosek, 2010;Sears et al, 2008;Wakslak, Jost, Tyler, & Chen, 2007;Yoshimura & Hardin, 2009 Foels & Pappas, 2004) or in interpersonal rather than intergroup competition (e.g., Cozzolino & Snyder, 2008).…”

Mujeres y liderazgo: ¿discapacitadas para ejercer el liderazgo en el ámbito público?

“…Sin embargo, las mujeres perciben mayor facilidad para producir beneficios humanitarios. El efecto de los beneficios humanitarios puede no ser específico de roles de líder, puesto que existe una mayor preferencia entre las mujeres que entre los hombres a que se produzcan estos beneficios como un atributo del trabajo 60 , así como un mayor compromiso general de las mujeres a políticas sociales 61 . El que las mujeres tengan mayores reservas sobre los roles directivos puede influir sobre sus relaciones más cercanas y de género tal y como encontró Lips 62 , quien en sus estudios concluyó que las mujeres, más que los hombres, creían que los roles de liderazgo pueden limitar sus oportunidades para mantener buenas relaciones cercanas.…”