Implicit but not explicit stereotyping predicts backlash against agentic women candidates

Evidence

Benevolent prejudice is insidious and stealthy, operating beneath the social radar to undermine the progress of women, particularly those with ability and ambition – the very women Seyfried and Hendrick (1977) predicted would succeed. For example, in one study, applicants for management positions (either male or female) described themselves as competitive and gave strong examples of their leadership ability (Rudman & Glick, 2001). As in the past (Rudman, 1998), results showed that women risk backlash effects if they “act like a man.” Although women were rated as highly competent, men were viewed as more likable and, as a result, they were more likely to be hired. Moreover, people who scored higher on the implicit measure of gender stereotyping, the IAT, tended to dislike masterful women more; there were no effects for the explicit (selfreported) stereotyping measure. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that agentic women are rejected because they violate prescriptive stereotypes (i.e., are viewed as insufficiently nice) and implicate the importance of nonconscious gender beliefs as barriers to gender parity. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 764

Categorization

• XREF: Evidence that nonconscious beliefs, not reported attitudes, predict discrimination — corroborates implicit-measure critiques of Allport-era self-report contact studies.
• SHARE: For a colleague focused on hiring-bias measurement: the IAT-vs-explicit dissociation in predicting backlash against competent women is a clean empirical anchor.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 764