Reducing gender bias in the evaluation and selection of future leaders: The role of decision-makers' mindsets about the universality of leadership potential.

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-31 DOI:10.1037/apl0001112
Zhi Liu, Aneeta Rattan, Krishna Savani
{"title":"Reducing gender bias in the evaluation and selection of future leaders: The role of decision-makers' mindsets about the universality of leadership potential.","authors":"Zhi Liu, Aneeta Rattan, Krishna Savani","doi":"10.1037/apl0001112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Extensive research has documented organizational decision-makers' preference for men over women when they evaluate and select candidates for leadership positions. We conceptualize a novel construct-mindsets about the universality of leadership potential-that can help reduce this bias. People can believe either that only some individuals have high leadership potential (i.e., a <i>nonuniversal mindset</i>) or that most individuals have high leadership potential (i.e., a <i>universal mindset</i>). Five studies investigated the relationship between these mindsets and decision-makers' gender biases in leader evaluation and selection decisions. The more senior government officials in China held a universal mindset, the less they showed gender bias when rating their subordinates' leadership capability (Study 1). Working adults in the United Kingdom who held a more universal mindset exhibited less gender bias when evaluating and selecting job candidates for a leadership position (Study 2). In an experiment, Singaporean students exposed to a universal mindset exhibited less gender bias when evaluating and selecting candidates than those exposed to a nonuniversal mindset (Study 3). Another experiment with working adults in China replicated this pattern and added a control condition to confirm the directionality of the effect (Study 4). Last, Study 5 showed that a more universal mindset was associated with less gender bias particularly among decision-makers with stronger gender stereotypes in the domain of leadership. This research demonstrates that, although they are seemingly unrelated to gender, mindsets about the universality of leadership potential can influence the extent to which people express gender bias in the leadership context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1924-1951"},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001112","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Extensive research has documented organizational decision-makers' preference for men over women when they evaluate and select candidates for leadership positions. We conceptualize a novel construct-mindsets about the universality of leadership potential-that can help reduce this bias. People can believe either that only some individuals have high leadership potential (i.e., a nonuniversal mindset) or that most individuals have high leadership potential (i.e., a universal mindset). Five studies investigated the relationship between these mindsets and decision-makers' gender biases in leader evaluation and selection decisions. The more senior government officials in China held a universal mindset, the less they showed gender bias when rating their subordinates' leadership capability (Study 1). Working adults in the United Kingdom who held a more universal mindset exhibited less gender bias when evaluating and selecting job candidates for a leadership position (Study 2). In an experiment, Singaporean students exposed to a universal mindset exhibited less gender bias when evaluating and selecting candidates than those exposed to a nonuniversal mindset (Study 3). Another experiment with working adults in China replicated this pattern and added a control condition to confirm the directionality of the effect (Study 4). Last, Study 5 showed that a more universal mindset was associated with less gender bias particularly among decision-makers with stronger gender stereotypes in the domain of leadership. This research demonstrates that, although they are seemingly unrelated to gender, mindsets about the universality of leadership potential can influence the extent to which people express gender bias in the leadership context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

减少未来领导者评估和选择中的性别偏见:决策者对领导力潜力普遍性的心态作用。
广泛的研究记录了组织决策者在评估和选择领导职位候选人时对男性比对女性的偏好。我们概念化了一种关于领导潜力普遍性的新的建构心态,这有助于减少这种偏见。人们可以相信只有一些人具有很高的领导潜力(即非普遍心态),也可以相信大多数人具有很强的领导潜力。五项研究调查了这些心态与决策者在领导者评估和选拔决策中的性别偏见之间的关系。中国的高级政府官员越是持有普遍的心态,他们在评价下属的领导能力时就越没有表现出性别偏见(研究1)。在英国,持有更普遍心态的在职成年人在评估和选择领导职位候选人时表现出的性别偏见较少(研究2)。在一项实验中,暴露于普遍心态的新加坡学生在评估和选择候选人时比暴露于非普遍心态的学生表现出更少的性别偏见(研究3)。另一项针对中国在职成年人的实验复制了这一模式,并添加了一个对照条件来确认效果的方向性(研究4)。最后,研究5表明,更普遍的心态与更少的性别偏见有关,尤其是在领导领域性别刻板印象更强的决策者中。这项研究表明,尽管他们似乎与性别无关,但关于领导潜力普遍性的心态会影响人们在领导环境中表达性别偏见的程度。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信