Gender-fair language in the context of leadership: Preventing the lack of fit for women

Women are still underrepresented in leadership due to a perceived a ‘lack of fit’. Thus, women are hired less likely, evaluated unfavorably or are less willing to take over a leadership role than their male counterparts. Because gender-fair language (e.g., feminine-masculine word pairs, German: ‘Geschäftsführerin/Geschäftsführer’, CEO, fem./CEO, masc.) leads to a higher mental inclusion of women compared to generic masculine forms (German: ‘Geschäftsführer’, CEO,masc.), we argue that masculine forms endorse the ‘lack of fit’ for women in leadership, whereas gender-fair language reduces it. Three studies support our assumption. Masculine forms led to a ‘lack of fit’ for women in leader selection: they were hired less likely (Study 1) and evaluated less favorably (Study 2) than their male counterparts. Moreover, women showed less willingness to apply when masculine forms were used in the advertisement for a leadership position. Contrary, no such gender-bias was obtained in case of gender-fair language.

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.