A closer look beneath the surface: Various facets of the think-manager-think-male stereotype

Previous research has indicated that successful managers are perceived as possessing characteristics that belong to a global masculine stereotype. This study was designed to compare the gender-stereotypical perception of leadership by investigating global and leadership-specific gender stereotypes and contrasting self-perception and the perceptionby others. Descriptive and prescriptive norms were analyzed and abilities studied in a leadership context. The sample consists of 215 management students, and the results indicate an impact of gender stereotypes on the perception of leadership by women and men. Ratings of the importance of leadership characteristics yielded a less gender-stereotypic view, especially by female participants. In their self-evaluations women and men did not differ in the degree in which they possess person- and task-oriented skills. They also did not differ in their ratings of the importance of possessing these skills themselves. Finally, women reported that they possess task-oriented abilities more seldom than such abilities were attributed to leaders-in-general.

The influence of gender-stereotyped perfumes on leadership attribution

The classification of perfumes as ‘women's’ and ‘men's’ fragrances is based on certain gender stereotypes. In two experiments, female and male participants were asked to assume the role of a manager. In Experiment 1, they read an application for the position of a junior manager written by a male or female job applicant. Application papers were prepared with a typically masculine perfume, a typically feminine perfume or no perfume at all (control group). In Experiment 2, participants conducted a job interview with a female or male applicant (a confederate) who had applied the respective perfume or no perfume. Persons with a typically masculine perfume were ‘employed’ with a higher degree of certainty compared to persons with a typically feminine perfume.

Effekte des generischen Maskulinums und alternativer Sprachformen auf den gedanklichen Einbezug von Frauen

In der feministischen Linguistik wird angenommen, daß maskuline Bezeichnungen, die generisch benutzt werden (Bezeichnungen von Personen beiderlei Geschlechts durch die maskuline Form, wie z.B. die Wissenschaftler, die Studenten), weibliche Personen weniger vorstellbar oder sichtbar machen als männliche Personen. Verschiedene experimentelle Untersuchungen konnten diese Annahme für den englischen Sprachraum bestätigen. Für die deutsche Sprache existieren dagegen bislang sehr wenige Studien zu dieser Frage. Es werden vier Experimente vorgestellt, die untersuchen, ob unterschiedliche Sprachversionen - ,Beidnennung‘ (Studentinnen und Studenten), ,Neutral‘ (Studierende), ,Generisches Maskulinum‘ (Studenten) und “Großes I“ (StudentInnen) - den gedanklichen Einbezug von Frauen beeinflussen. Über alle Experimente hinweg zeigte sich, daß bei Personenreferenzen im generischen Maskulinum ein geringerer gedanklicher Einbezug von Frauen zu beobachten war als bei alternativen Sprachformen wie der Beidnennung oder dem “Großen I“ (z.B. seltenere Nennungen von beliebten weiblichen Persönlichkeiten oder von politischen Kandidatinnen für das Amt des Bundeskanzlers/der Bundeskanzlerin der BRD).

Meta-cognition about biological sex and gender-stereotypic physical appearance: Consequences for the assessment of leadership competence

Previous findings are inconsistent with regard to whether men are judged as being more or less competent leaders than women. However, masculine-relative to feminine-looking persons seem to be judged consistently as more competent leaders. Can this different impact of biological sex and physical appearance be due to the disparate availability of meta-cognitive knowledge about both sources? The results of Study 1 indicated that individuals possess meta-cognitive knowledge about a possible biasing influence of persons’ biological sex, but not for their physical appearance. In Study 2, participants judged the leadership competence of a male versus female stimulus person with either masculine or feminine physical appearance. In addition, the available cognitive capacity was manipulated. When high capacity was available, participants corrected for the influence of stimulus persons’ sex, but they fell prey to this influence under cognitive load. However, the effect of physical appearance was not moderated by cognitive capacity.

Can gender-fair language reduce gender stereotyping and discrimination?

Gender-fair language (GFL) aims at reducing gender stereotyping and discrimination. Two principle strategies have been employed to make languages gender-fair and to treat women and men symmetrically: neutralization and feminization. Neutralization is achieved, for example, by replacing male-masculine forms (policeman) with gender-unmarked forms (police officer), whereas feminization relies on the use of feminine forms to make female referents visible (i.e., the applicant… he or she instead of the applicant… he). By integrating research on (1) language structures, (2) language policies, and (3) individual language behavior, we provide a critical review of how GFL contributes to the reduction of gender stereotyping and discrimination. Our review provides a basis for future research and for scientifically based policy-making.

The social perception of heroes and murders: Effects of gender-inclusive language in media reports

The way media depict women and men can reinforce or diminish gender stereotyping. Which part does language play in this context? Are roles perceived as more gender-balanced when feminine role nouns are used in addition to masculine ones? Research on gender-inclusive language shows that the use of feminine-masculine word pairs tends to increase the visibility of women in various social roles. For example, when speakers of German were asked to name their favorite "heroine or hero in a novel," they listed more female characters than when asked to name their favorite "hero in a novel." The research reported in this article examines how the use of gender-inclusive language in news reports affects readers' own usage of such forms as well as their mental representation of women and men in the respective roles. In the main experiment, German participants (N = 256) read short reports about heroes or murderers which contained either masculine generics or gender-inclusive forms (feminine-masculine word pairs). Gender-inclusive forms enhanced participants' own usage of gender-inclusive language and this resulted in more gender-balanced mental representations of these roles. Reading about "heroines and heroes" made participants assume a higher percentage of women among persons performing heroic acts than reading about "heroes" only, but there was no such effect for murderers. A post-test suggested that this might be due to a higher accessibility of female exemplars in the category heroes than in the category murderers. Importantly, the influence of gender-inclusive language on the perceived percentage of women in a role was mediated by speakers' own usage of inclusive forms. This suggests that people who encounter gender-inclusive forms and are given an opportunity to use them, use them more themselves and in turn have more gender-balanced mental representations of social roles.

Does gender-fair language pay off? The social perception of professions from a cross-linguistic perspective

In many languages, masculine forms (e.g., German Lehrer, “teachers, masc.”) have traditionally been used to refer to both women and men, although feminine forms are available, too. Feminine-masculine word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) are recommended as gender-fair alternatives. A large body of empirical research documents that the use of gender-fair forms instead of masculine forms has a substantial impact on mental representations. Masculine forms activate more male representations even when used in a generic sense, whereas word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) lead to a higher cognitive inclusion of women (i.e., visibility of women). Some recent studies, however, have also shown that in a professional context word pairs may be associated with lesser status. The present research is the first to investigate both effects within a single paradigm. A cross-linguistic (Italian and German) study with 391 participants shows that word pairs help to avoid a male bias in the gender-typing of professions and increase women's visibility; at the same time, they decrease the estimated salaries of typically feminine professions (but do not affect perceived social status or competence). This potential payoff has implications for language policies aiming at gender-fairness.