Suchergebnisse

This research extends the role incongruity analysis of employment-related gender bias by investigating the role of dispositional and situational antecedents, specifically political ideology and the salience of cues to the traditional female gender role. The prediction that conservatives would show an anti-female candidate bias and liberals would show a pro-female bias when the traditional female gender role is salient was tested across three experimental studies. In Study 1, 126 participants evaluated a male or a female job applicant with thoughts of the traditional female gender role activated or not. Results showed that when the gender role is salient, political ideology moderates evaluations of the female candidates such that conservatives evaluate her negatively and liberals evaluate her positively. Study 2 (89 participants) replicated this effect and showed that this political ideology-based bias does not occur when the non-traditional female gender role is made salient. Study 2 also demonstrated that the observed effects are not driven by liberals' and conservatives' differing perceptions regarding the female applicant's qualifications for the job. Finally, Study 3 (159 participants) both replicated the political ideology-based evaluation bias for female candidates and demonstrated that this bias is mediated by conservatives' and liberals' attitudes toward the roles of women in society.

Understanding the complex manifestations of sexual stigma is crucial in helping to prevent discrimination toward sexual minorities. In this research, we examined the role of heterosexism within political ideology systems and the process through which these systems promote discrimination by focusing on sexual prejudice. Across four studies, we tested the predictions that more conservative political ideologies and greater levels of sexual prejudice will be associated with more negative evaluations of an applicant with a sexual stigma, and that prejudice will mediate the link between ideology and evaluation. We employed an experimental paradigm such that participants were presented nearly identical information in an intern applicant evaluation context, however, cues to sexual stigma were either present or absent. Overall, conservative ideology negatively predicted evaluation in the stigma, but not the control, condition and greater levels of sexual prejudice more strongly negatively predicted evaluations in the stigma, relative to control, condition. Finally, whereas ideology indirectly predicted candidate evaluation through prejudice generally, the effect was stronger for the applicant with the sexual stigma. This research extends the scholarship linking ideology to sexual stigma by examining employment discrimination and testing the mediating role of prejudice linking ideology to discrimination. By examining the role of ideology, it also broadens the research on bias in employment contexts. Understanding the role of both political ideology as well as individual sexual prejudice in discrimination may facilitate efforts to dismantle discrimination. ; peerReviewed ; publishedVersion

Understanding the complex manifestations of sexual stigma is crucial in helping to prevent discrimination toward sexual minorities. In this research, we examined the role of heterosexism within political ideology systems and the process through which these systems promote discrimination by focusing on sexual prejudice. Across four studies, we tested the predictions that more conservative political ideologies and greater levels of sexual prejudice will be associated with more negative evaluations of an applicant with a sexual stigma, and that prejudice will mediate the link between ideology and evaluation. We employed an experimental paradigm such that participants were presented nearly identical information in an intern applicant evaluation context, however, cues to sexual stigma were either present or absent. Overall, conservative ideology negatively predicted evaluation in the stigma, but not the control, condition and greater levels of sexual prejudice more strongly negatively predicted evaluations in the stigma, relative to control, condition. Finally, whereas ideology indirectly predicted candidate evaluation through prejudice generally, the effect was stronger for the applicant with the sexual stigma. This research extends the scholarship linking ideology to sexual stigma by examining employment discrimination and testing the mediating role of prejudice linking ideology to discrimination. By examining the role of ideology, it also broadens the research on bias in employment contexts. Understanding the role of both political ideology as well as individual sexual prejudice in discrimination may facilitate efforts to dismantle discrimination.

The gender gap in support for a female presidential candidate gathered much media attention with Hillary Clinton as a frontrunner for the 2008 democratic presidential nomination. Two common explanations for this gap are that women have more liberal gender role and political attitudes. We contend that another important, and distinct, factor for heightened support among women is a shared social identity. We tested these three explanations across two studies. In Study 1, hierarchical regression analyses revealed that both attitudes toward women and sex independently predict a significant proportion of the variance in willingness to elect a woman for president. In Study 2, hierarchical regression analyses showed that when entered together, attitudes toward female authority and sex independently predict support, but when political attitudes was entered, only sex and political attitudes predicted support for Clinton. Finally, as expected, when primed with their gender identity, women increased their support for Clinton and men decreased their support, and women perceived her more favorably and men less so. In sum, these studies strongly support the arguments that the gender gap in support for female presidential candidates stems in part from women's more liberal gender role and political attitudes, and also from women sharing the same gender social identity as a female candidate for commander in chief.

The role of leadership efficacy in women's reactance responses to stereotype-based leadership role expectations was examined in two laboratory studies. Participants, selected on the basis of leadership efficacy scores, served as leaders of ostensible three-person groups. Half were primed with the gender leadership stereotype. An immersive virtual environment designed for this research served as the leadership setting. Results indicated that the effects of stereotype activation on women leaders were moderated by leadership efficacy such that high efficacy leaders exhibited more positive, reactance responses (increased perceived performance, increased rated performance, greater domain identification, and higher well-being) than low efficacy leaders. Additionally, perceived performance mediated the domain identification and well-being effects of stereotype activation on high and low efficacy leaders.

Transformational and transactional leadership in both physical (i.e., face-to-face) and virtual settings were examined in a laboratory experiment. Leadership style (transformational or transactional) and group setting (face-to-face, immersive virtual environment, or intercom) were manipulated experimentally for three-person ad hoc work groups. Results indicated that, compared to transactional leadership, transformational leadership was associated with decreases in quantitative performance but increases in qualitative performance, leadership satisfaction, and group cohesiveness. Contrary to expectations, neither self- nor collective efficacy mediated the performance effects of leadership style; trust, however, appeared to play an important mediational role. Group performance and cohesiveness were similar across group settings; however, group members were most satisfied with their leader when interacting face-to-face. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

This volume draws on disciplines as different as Psychology, Anthropology, History and Biology to explain when and why individuals act to promote their own self-interest and when they sacrifice their own outcomes so that others can benefit.

In this research, we contribute to a nascent literature examining how cues to social class can guide voters' political judgments. Drawing upon and merging a voting‐cues framework with the stereotype‐content model, we test predictions that, relative to those from high‐class backgrounds, candidates from lower‐ and working‐class backgrounds will be perceived to be more ideologically liberal, warmer, and will be evaluated more positively. We test these predictions across four experimental studies (NStudy1 = 200; NStudy2 = 537; NStudy3 = 352; NStudy4 = 654) employing a candidate‐evaluation paradigm; participants were presented with basic candidate background information, including cues to candidate class and other demographics, and were asked to read an excerpt from a speech before providing their judgments. Findings reveal that candidates from lower‐ and working‐class backgrounds were perceived to be more liberal and warmer than those from high‐class backgrounds. Additionally, we found that lower‐class candidates were generally evaluated more positively than high‐class candidates, and we found some evidence for evaluations across class to be moderated by participants' political ideology. These effects generally held across candidate gender and race. This work has important theoretical and practical implications offering insight into the social‐class gap between the electorate and the largely elite elected policymakers.

n this research, we contribute to a nascent literature examining how cues to social class can guide voters' political judgments. Drawing upon and merging a voting-cues framework with the stereotype-content model, we test predictions that, relative to those from high-class backgrounds, candidates from lower- and working-class backgrounds will be perceived to be more ideologically liberal, warmer, and will be evaluated more positively. We test these predictions across four experimental studies (NStudy1 = 200; NStudy2 = 537; NStudy3 = 352; NStudy4 = 654) employing a candidate-evaluation paradigm; participants were presented with basic candidate background information, including cues to candidate class and other demographics, and were asked to read an excerpt from a speech before providing their judgments. Findings reveal that candidates from lower- and working-class backgrounds were perceived to be more liberal and warmer than those from high-class backgrounds. Additionally, we found that lower-class candidates were generally evaluated more positively than high-class candidates, and we found some evidence for evaluations across class to be moderated by participants' political ideology. These effects generally held across candidate gender and race. This work has important theoretical and practical implications offering insight into the social-class gap between the electorate and the largely elite elected policymakers.

This research extends our understanding of ethical decision making on the part of leaders by merging social role and self-construal perspectives. Interdependent self-construal is generally seen as enhancing concern for justice and moral values. Across two studies we tested the prediction that non-leading group members' interdependent self-construal would be associated with lower levels of unethical decision making on behalf of their group but that, in contrast, this relationship would be weaker for leaders, given their social role. These predictions were experimentally tested by assigning participants to the role of leader or non-leading group member and assessing the association between their interdependent self-construal and their unethical decision making. Across both studies interdependence predicted less unethical decision making on behalf of one's group for non-leading group members. However, the leader role was shown to weaken, and even reverse, this relationship. This research demonstrates that self-construal influences group-based ethical decision making but that the nature of this influence is moderated by social role.

At every turn the variations in individual perspectives on human rights and potentials, contrasting philosophies on social justice and political structure, and even debates over the best solutions to pressing social problems reflect the vital tension between the one and the many. Are humans, as a species, motivated more by selfish desires or by a commitment to helping others? Can society require that individuals contribute to a common good, even when they will not personally benefit from it? Is a commitment to a common good that will benefit generations to come more morally laudable than working diligently to achieve personal gain? Does capacity for self-sacrifice transform the effective leader into a benevolent one? The chapters in this book draw on psychology, anthropology, history, philosophy, political science, and biology to answer these questions about the inherent tension between the individual and the collective, yielding insights into the nature of philanthropy, the history of individualism in America, brain mechanisms that sustain cooperation, altruism, volunteerism, international aid, and the evolutionary roots of social compassion. ; https://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf/1028/thumbnail.jpg