Side effects of gender-fair language: How feminine job titles influence the evaluation of female applicants

In many languages, feminization has been used as a strategy to make language more gender-fair, because masculine terms, even in a generic function, exhibit a male bias. Up to date, little is known about possible side effects of this language use, for example, in personnel selection. In three studies, conducted in Polish, we analyzed how a female applicant was evaluated in a recruitment process, depending on whether she was introduced with a feminine or masculine job title. To avoid influences from existing occupations and terms, we used fictitious job titles in Studies 1 and 2: diarolożka (feminine) and diarolog (masculine). In Study 3, we referred to existing occupations that varied in gender stereotypicality. In all studies, female applicants with a feminine job title were evaluated less favorably than both a male applicant (Study 1) and a female applicant with a masculine job title (Studies 1, 2, and 3). This effect was independent of the gender stereotypicality of the occupation (Study 3). Participants' political attitudes, however, moderated the effect: Conservatives devaluated female applicants with a feminine title more than liberals (Studies 2 and 3).

The gender typicality of faces and its impact on visual processing and on hiring decisions

Past research has shown that the gender typicality of applicants’ faces affects leadership selection irrespective of a candidate’s gender: A masculine facial appearance is congruent with masculine-typed leadership roles, thus masculine-looking applicants are hired more certainly than feminine-looking ones. In the present study, we extended this line of research by investigating hiring decisions for both masculine- and feminine-typed professional roles. Furthermore, we used eye tracking to examine the visual exploration of applicants’ portraits. Our results indicate that masculine-looking applicants were favored for the masculine-typed role (leader) and feminine-looking applicants for the feminine-typed role (team member). Eye movement patterns showed that information about gender category and facial appearance was integrated during first fixations of the portraits. Hiring decisions, however, were not based on this initial analysis, but occurred at a second stage, when the portrait was viewed in the context of considering the applicant for a specific job.

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.

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.