•Would providing the information that the company was mostly men create a priming effect and lead participants to want to favor a male for a high-management position? I wonder if this had any effect on their ratings. If this was not provided, would they have been less strict on their ratings of the women applicants? •May there be a difference in competence ratings if mothers are parents of college students or older versus younger children still much more dependent on their parents?
Would the results of Heilman and Okimoto’s study hold in future generations? That is, once (if) a majority of women hold jobs rather than stay at home, will the gender stereotype of the stay-at-home mom still hold for women in the workplace?
It would be interesting to replicate this study (or if the authors would have asked it in this study) and have starting salary as one of the DV's. That is have the participants assign a salary to each potential candidate based upon the candidates "skills and abilities". It would be interesting to attach a dollar amount to the adversity that mothers face in the work place.
As Heliman and Okimoto noted in the limitations of their first study, it is illegal to ask an individual to reveal their marital status and if they have children in a job application/interview. However, in the case of internal promotions/selection, much of this information is already known and could be used against an individual in a selection decision (e.g. Study 2). How can we help individuals overcome these biases in internal selection decisions? What factors other than anticipated competence and expectations about agenticism might influence screening decisions? How might different organizational cultures influence these decisions?
I wonder if it would make a difference in employers perceptions of a parent's level of work focus if the employer was aware that he or she had a stay-at-home spouse? It seems the general concern of employers about parents in the workplace is that a parent generally is motivated to put their child(ren) first in their priorities. If there is another parent whose primary responsibility is caring for the needs of the children, being a parent could potentially be seen as an asset to an employer because parents who have children to support tend to have heightened commitment to their employment situation as long as they know their children are safe and being cared for.
The authors discuss some of the challenges mothers face in the workplace, however, it seems to be a double-edged sword, what do you think women who choose not to have children may bepercived by their coworkers?
In my experience of 25 years of work as a mother, I see the role as very strongly promoting of agentic, instrumental behaviors (not in conflict with nurturing concern for others.) This has prepared me for work in male-gender typed work context (the Roman Catholic ministry!) Perhaps research on the agentic nature of mothering behaviors could help inform and decrease the bias against mothers in the workplace?
So moms have it pretty bad in the workplace. I think it would be interesting to better understand the experiences (or lack thereof) that the participants in this study had working with mothers in their own workplaces. Is this a stereotype that is learned early on, or is it formed by having to bear the burden of increased workload/potential chaos when a “mom to be” needs to take a time off to go on maternity leave? I think it would have been interesting for them to assess whether or not the participants had such experiences and control for it. It we found that participants had negative experiences as a result, then business could better prepare for this to hopefully reduce any potential discrimination in the future. I could see increased discrimination for men in the future as it is becoming increasingly more common for men to take paternity leave.
•Would providing the information that the company was mostly men create a priming effect and lead participants to want to favor a male for a high-management position? I wonder if this had any effect on their ratings. If this was not provided, would they have been less strict on their ratings of the women applicants?
ReplyDelete•May there be a difference in competence ratings if mothers are parents of college students or older versus younger children still much more dependent on their parents?
Would the results of Heilman and Okimoto’s study hold in future generations? That is, once (if) a majority of women hold jobs rather than stay at home, will the gender stereotype of the stay-at-home mom still hold for women in the workplace?
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting to replicate this study (or if the authors would have asked it in this study) and have starting salary as one of the DV's. That is have the participants assign a salary to each potential candidate based upon the candidates "skills and abilities". It would be interesting to attach a dollar amount to the adversity that mothers face in the work place.
ReplyDeleteAs Heliman and Okimoto noted in the limitations of their first study, it is illegal to ask an individual to reveal their marital status and if they have children in a job application/interview. However, in the case of internal promotions/selection, much of this information is already known and could be used against an individual in a selection decision (e.g. Study 2). How can we help individuals overcome these biases in internal selection decisions? What factors other than anticipated competence and expectations about agenticism might influence screening decisions? How might different organizational cultures influence these decisions?
ReplyDeleteI wonder if it would make a difference in employers perceptions of a parent's level of work focus if the employer was aware that he or she had a stay-at-home spouse? It seems the general concern of employers about parents in the workplace is that a parent generally is motivated to put their child(ren) first in their priorities. If there is another parent whose primary responsibility is caring for the needs of the children, being a parent could potentially be seen as an asset to an employer because parents who have children to support tend to have heightened commitment to their employment situation as long as they know their children are safe and being cared for.
ReplyDeleteThe authors discuss some of the challenges mothers face in the workplace, however, it seems to be a double-edged sword, what do you think women who choose not to have children may bepercived by their coworkers?
ReplyDeleteIn my experience of 25 years of work as a mother, I see the role as very strongly promoting of agentic, instrumental behaviors (not in conflict with nurturing concern for others.) This has prepared me for work in male-gender typed work context (the Roman Catholic ministry!) Perhaps research on the agentic nature of mothering behaviors could help inform and decrease the bias against mothers in the workplace?
ReplyDeleteSo moms have it pretty bad in the workplace. I think it would be interesting to better understand the experiences (or lack thereof) that the participants in this study had working with mothers in their own workplaces. Is this a stereotype that is learned early on, or is it formed by having to bear the burden of increased workload/potential chaos when a “mom to be” needs to take a time off to go on maternity leave? I think it would have been interesting for them to assess whether or not the participants had such experiences and control for it. It we found that participants had negative experiences as a result, then business could better prepare for this to hopefully reduce any potential discrimination in the future. I could see increased discrimination for men in the future as it is becoming increasingly more common for men to take paternity leave.
ReplyDelete