Psycology Matrix

¶ … Psychology Matrix

In the workplace, I noticed repeatedly that gender stereotyping is still present nowadays. Stereotyping is most obvious in hiring process. For instance I witnessed a personnel selection procedure in which the manager of the company preferred a woman for the position of secretary, although there were a several men applicants for the job. The position of secretary itself is rather stereotyped, being considered characteristic to females. Moreover, I also noticed in my working experience that males are preferred for leading positions. If a male and a female with similar qualifications and experience apply for the same management position, it is more likely that the man will get the job. And this is relevant for different levels of management positions. However, the chances that the man is chosen vary with the culture and type of managerial culture. An autocratic, hierarchical managerial culture tends to be more affected by stereotyping as power is concentrated to one, or few persons, who are usually men. And again, continuing with the thread of arguments to prove the existence of stereotyping in the workplace I should mention the pay system of companies. I experienced myself the unfairness of different paying because of gender differences. Women tend to receive smaller salaries and lower hierarchical positions. In my experience I noticed how a men and a woman of the same age, with the same study background, with the same working experience have received different treatment in terms of pay and hierarchical position. There is research supporting the ideas written above, for example Agars, M. (2004) in the article Reconsidering the Impact of Gender Stereotypes on the Advancement of Women in Organizations acknowledges the fact that "stereotypes are a certain and meaningful contributor to the limited presence of women in high-level positions." However, the greatest problem related to stereotyping is that they are used to prejudge people's abilities and competence and develop unfair and incorrect expectations (however unconsciously they are employed). Another possible explanation offered by research is that effective leadership is perceived as characterized by traits similar to those associated with masculine gender roles. But the counterbalancing discovery made by extensive research that indicates "that effective leadership http://www.springerlink.com/content/w573k57313q2hhr7/xxlarge8220.gif http://www.springerlink.com/content/w573k57313q2hhr7/xxlarge8221.gif http://www.springerlink.com/content/w573k57313q2hhr7/xxlarge8220.gif http://www.springerlink.com/content/w573k57313q2hhr7/xxlarge8221.gif behaviors -- behaviors that seem to represent both masculine and feminine styles" (Cann & Siegfried, 1990).

Added to this is the fact that gender stereotyping does not occur only among adults. Children of all ages are forced to conform to gender norms. Moreover, at a close look, the stereotyping may be a learned social behavior. Because children do not learn only the fact that boys are dressed in blue and little girls wear pink, but they are also forced to learn that the codes of masculinity are hardness, aggressiveness, and emotional distance, while girls learn to be submissive, delicate, non-combatant, amiable. There is also research to support this idea, a comprehensive study related to this isue being initiated by Campbell et. al. (2004). The researchers tested the hypothesis according to which: "Gender schema theory proposes that children's acquisition of gender labels and gender stereotypes informs gender-congruent behaviour."

The study of social psychology can be of a great help to identify the stereotypes and the way they interact with our lives. A great body of research suggests that stereotypes are implicit, unconscious. In the workplace, however, they are more obvious, due to the fact that they appear repeatedly, and generate aversive behaviors as an outcome of unfairness. This is also true in socio-political context. Because stereotypes are implicit, the social psychology research and methods or simply the great amount of information on this subject would be very helpful for at least to gain awareness on the existence of such processes. The modification of stereotypes is a difficult process as it implies the change of attitudes and beliefs. However, social psychology has studied not only the implicit processes in stereotyping and prejudice, but also the perceptions of gender roles over time and how they impact various areas of social life such as: gender stereotyping of women in media, in politics, in organizations, in universities, in human-computer-interaction activities, law testimonies, and the factors underlying this processes. Social psychology is also important because it tries to identify not only the factors that underlie and influence the process of stereotyping, but also the consequences of the process such as - self-perception, attribution, rewards and social status. Another important aspect is the accuracy of stereotypes - the degree to which they reflect real personality traits of the people to whom they have been attributed - the idea being a matter of debate for many years (e.g., Bodenhausen, 1988; Brigham, 1971; Hoffman and Hurst, 1990; Judd & Park, 1993). (Allen, B., 1995).

All in all, social psychology knowledge leads to the identification and challenge of gender stereotypes, to the identification of other ways of thinking about stereotypes and to the breaking of stereotypes.

The next step after the information gathering stage (which consists mainly of observation) is the identification of stereotypes stage. In order to assess the presence of stereotypes, in men and women, I would probably use a questionnaire, followed by an experimental design.

The questionnaire is made of two parts, describing two persons in the process of selection for a high level (management) position: a woman and a man.

The questionnaire is made of an ambiguous situation described at the beginning, and it is followed by a series of specific questions. An example of an ambiguous situation would be the short profile of a woman, a candidate for a leadership position. Her studies are specified and also her work experience and family background (if she is married or not, if she has children or not). The job responsibilities on the former leading position she occupied are also taken into consideration. Below the description, the respondent is asked to state an opinion about what he/she thinks of the woman's managerial competence (abilities). The situation (three or four phrases long) is followed by a series of specific questions, rated on a five-point Likert scale. An example of question would be "she is very good at resolving conflicts amiably" and the respondent will rate his/hers answer on a five point-scale, where 1 means "I totally disagree" and 5 "I totally agree" with the statement. The second part of the questionnaire consists of the same ambiguous situation, this time, the main character being a man. The situation is identical in what concerns the studies and work experience and the family background. His previous job responsibilities are the same as in the first case, are similar with the woman's previous job responsibilities on a similar management position.

After presenting the ambiguous situation, the respondent is asked to state an opinion concerning the man's managerial abilities. The answer is followed by the same questions as in the first situation. The questions, therefore, are drawn up in the same way, are identical with the first set of questions. The questions are designed in such way as to bring forth gender stereotypes, meaning that I would expect that the woman will be rated higher for abilities such as: interpersonal skills and conflict resolution in an amiable way, as opposed to the man, who will get higher scores for authority and power.