Two investigations of ?female modesty? in achievement situations

Heatherington, Laurie; Daubman, Kimberly A.; Bates, Cynthia Helen; Ahn, Alicia; Brown, Heather; Preston, Camille

doi:10.1007/bf00289215

Cited by 127 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Halpern et al (2007), however, reported male-female ratios ranging from 6.9:1 to 14.4:1 for tenure-track faculty in elite universities in physical sciences, mathematics, and engineering. Thus, as Lubinski and colleagues have reported for the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (e.g., Lubinski & Benbow, 1992, 2006, sex differences in career motivation and occupational interest likely contribute, as may vulnerability to identity threat from situational cues (Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007) and sex differences in self-confidence (e.g., Deaux, 1976;Heatherington et al, 1993). All of these, of course, possibly have roots in biological differences, differences in socialization experiences, and differences in the personal and professional trade-offs required to maintain high-level careers in math and science fields (Halpern et al, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Sex Differences in Variability in General Intelligence: A New Look at the Old Question

Johnson

Carothers

Deary

2008

Perspect Psychol Sci

187

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT-The idea that general intelligence may be more variable in males than in females has a long history. In recent years it has been presented as a reason that there is little, if any, mean sex difference in general intelligence, yet males tend to be overrepresented at both the top and bottom ends of its overall, presumably normal, distribution. Clear analysis of the actual distribution of general intelligence based on large and appropriately population-representative samples is rare, however. Using two population-wide surveys of general intelligence in 11-year-olds in Scotland, we showed that there were substantial departures from normality in the distribution, with less variability in the higher range than in the lower. Despite mean IQ-scale scores of 100, modal scores were about 105. Even above modal level, males showed more variability than females. This is consistent with a model of the population distribution of general intelligence as a mixture of two essentially normal distributions, one reflecting normal variation in general intelligence and one reflecting normal variation in effects of genetic and environmental conditions involving mental retardation. Though present at the high end of the distribution, sex differences in variability did not appear to account for sex differences in high-level achievement. Perspectives on Psychological Science -November 2008 -In PressThe variability hypothesis, which posits that general intelligence may be more biologically variable in males than in females, has a long history in both scientific and political writings. In recent years, it has received renewed attention as an explanation for the presence of greater numbers of males than females in technology, engineering, and the highest levels of scientific research. As is often the case in areas of research involving demographic group differences, much of the literature has been emotionally charged, and the empirical data have often been ambiguous. Even when observed results have seemed clear, researchers have raised issues involving adequacy of overall sample size and differences in relative selectivity of male and female samples, relevant experiential background, participant responses to the testing situation, and rates of physical and

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Sex Differences in Variability in General Intelligence: A New Look at the Old Question

Johnson

Carothers

Deary

2008

Perspect Psychol Sci

187

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, they are more likely than men to attribute higher-than-expected performance to luck rather than ability (Halperin and Abrams 1978), more likely to feel they deserve lower pay levels and, for identical work, regard lower pay levels as more fair than men do (Major 1989;Jackson and Grabski 1988). Women tend overall to have lower levels of self-confidence and competitiveness than men (Ahlgren 1983;Beyer 1990, Gibbons et al 1994, Heatherington et al 1993, Lenney 1977.…”

Section: Career Referents At the Same Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women's and Men's Career Referents: How Gender Composition and Comparison Level Shape Career Expectations

Gibson

Lawrence

2010

Organization Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines how women's and men's career referents—the people they see as having similar careers—affect career expectations. We raise two questions. First, what is the relative effect of the gender composition and comparison level of career referents on such expectations? Second, what happens to career expectations when women and men identify career referents at the same comparison level? Current research suggests that women have lower career expectations than men because they compare themselves with women who hold lower-level positions than the career referents identified by men. Thus, if women and men identify with career referents at a similar level, their career expectations should be equal. However, this chain of reasoning has not been tested. Using data collected from a large organization, we identify both the specific individuals that women and men perceive as having similar careers and these referents' career levels, defined as their hierarchical level in the firm. The results show that the level of career referents is more important than their gender composition in explaining individuals' career expectations. In contrast to extant explanations, the results show that even when women identify career referents at the same levels as men do, they still exhibit significantly lower career expectations. Drawing on social comparison theory, we speculate that this occurs because men's expectations are bolstered by extreme upward comparisons, whereas women's expectations are dampened, perhaps because they see high-achieving others as representing a less probable goal.

show abstract

“…It follows that women who have internalized the traditional female gender role may be less attracted to leadership roles (Lips 2000), and therefore be less likely to strive for promotion into such positions (Van Vianen and Fischer 2002). For example, research has demonstrated that gender stereotypes may lower women's belief to succeed at masculine-typed tasks and occupations (e.g., Heatherington et al 1993;Sieverding 2003) or even impair their performance or career aspirations (e.g., Davies et al 2002Davies et al , 2005. Moreover, in a longitudinal study, Abele (2003) demonstrated that, self-ascribed agentic traits, but not communal traits, predicted objective and subjective career success for both men and women.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Am I the Right Candidate? Self-Ascribed Fit of Women and Men to a Leadership Position

Bosak

Sczesny

2008

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women are assumed to show a self-ascribed lack-of-fit to leadership positions compared to men (Heilman Research in Organizational Behavior 5:269-298, 1983). The present study examined whether this gender difference would diminish when agency is accounted for and whether a stimulus person's gender would alter women's self-ascribed fit. German management students (91 women, 95 men) received a fictitious recruitment advertisement for a leadership position that portrayed a man, a woman, or both a man and a woman. Participants indicated their perceptions of agency and suitability to the advertised position. As predicted, women judged themselves as less suitable for the leadership position than men and participants' self-reported agency mediated this effect. Furthermore, all participants felt most suitable if a male and a female stimulus person were portrayed.

show abstract

Two investigations of ?female modesty? in achievement situations

Cited by 127 publications

References 45 publications

Sex Differences in Variability in General Intelligence: A New Look at the Old Question

Sex Differences in Variability in General Intelligence: A New Look at the Old Question

Women's and Men's Career Referents: How Gender Composition and Comparison Level Shape Career Expectations

Am I the Right Candidate? Self-Ascribed Fit of Women and Men to a Leadership Position

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About