Gender stereotypes

Article
Gender Stereotypes and Their Impact IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review
10(2) 192–208, 2021
on Women’s Career Progressions from a © 2021 Indian Institute
of Management Kozhikode
Managerial Perspective
Reprints and permissions:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
DOI: 10.1177/2277975220975513
journals.sagepub.com/home/ksm
Naznin Tabassum1 and Bhabani Shankar Nayak2
Abstract
Gender stereotypes continue to exist and are transmitted through media, and through social, educational and recreational
socialization, which promote gender prejudice and discrimination. This paper argues that contemporary management cul-
ture does not critically engage with the social theories of gender studies, which could help in developing gender-neutral
affirmative action-oriented managerial perspectives. The paper outlines different aspects of gender stereotyping and
their impact on women’s career progressions from a managerial perspective, which engages with the critical theories
of gender studies. The paper contributes to existing literature by identifying the antecedents of gender stereotypes and
their impacts on the career progressions of women in management. It advances theoretical understanding of three clear
conceptual shifts, that is, (a) Women in Management, (b) Women and Management and (c) Gender and Management. The
theoretical transition from Women in Management to Women and Management led to progressive conceptual shifts in
management literature but gender stereotypes continue to exist in society.
Keywords
Women in management, sex-roles, gender stereotypes, gender discrimination
Introduction that there are progressive and radical shifts in the manage-
ment theories from Women in Management, Women and
Many gender-related barriers and biases have declined Management and Gender and Management. The theoreti-
over the years but gender stereotypes continue to create cal transition from Women in Management to Women and
problems in the progress of women’s careers. The availa- Management did not change the practice of gender stereo-
bility of opportunities for the career progressions of women typing in society.
continues to be negatively affected by gender stereotypes, Gender stereotyping is considered to be a significant
which shape managerial behaviour and occupational out- issue obstructing the career progressions of women in
looks in the workplace with patriarchal expectations. There management. The continuation of minimal representation
are only 29 per cent women in senior management posi- and participation of women in top-level management
tions worldwide (IBR, 2020). The World Economic Forum positions (Elacqua, Beehr, Hansen, & Webster, 2009;
(2017) suggested that an average gender gap of 32.0 per World Economic Forum, 2017) forms the basis of this
cent existed in four areas, namely, ‘Economic Participation research. After critically reviewing the existing literature,
and Opportunity’, ‘Educational Attainment’, ‘Health and it was noticed that although numerous studies have been
Survival’ and ‘Political Empowerment’. This shows an undertaken in the area of sex-role stereotyping, its causes
increase from an average gender gap of 31.7 per cent since are still under-researched. Unless the causes are found, the
previous years. Despite many policies to increase gender phenomenon will continue to exist (Desvaux, Devillard-
equality in recent decades, gender discrimination based on Hoellinger, & Baumgarten, 2007). Therefore, it is essential
gender stereotypes continues to exist. This paper argues to explore management literature in detail to identify key
1
Coventry Business School, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
2
University for the Creative Arts, UK.
Corresponding author:
Naznin Tabassum, Lecturer in Business Strategy, Coventry Business School, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5DL, UK.
E-mail: [email protected]
Tabassum and Nayak 193
factors of gender stereotyping in relation to the career traditional attitude poses a threat to the career progressions
progressions of women. of women because they are not allowed to seek work
Stereotyping emerges in numerous contexts to aid outside the household or interact with persons outside the
functions demanded by those contexts. Multiple purposes family. Such patriarchal culture produces masculine
are served by stereotyped thinking reflecting a variety of working environment, where women managers tend to
cognitive and motivational processes (Hilton & Von idealize ‘men as managers, managers as men’ (Collinson &
Hippel, 1996). The emergence of stereotyping can be Hearn, 1995) and women managers become part of
understood as a way of simplifying the demands on the patriarchal working culture.
perceiver (Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994), allowing The impact of gender stereotyping on women is evident
the perceiver to rely on previously stored knowledge in irrespective of the level of position women belong to in an
place of incoming information, and to respond to several organization. However, it is more salient when managerial
environmental factors, such as different social roles (Eagly, or leadership positions are concerned (Koenig et al., 2011;
1995), group conflicts (Robinson, Keltner, Ward, & Ross Kang, 2012). For example, Schein (1973, 1975) in her
et al., 1995) and differences in power (Fiske, 1993). studies found that both male and female respondents
Stereotypes can also emerge as a way of justifying the agreed that successful leaders possess characteristics com-
status quo (Jost & Banaji, 1994) or in response to social monly associated with men, such as leadership ability,
identity (Hogg & Abrams, 1988). Moreover, it is vital to competitiveness, self-confidence, objectivity, aggressive-
remember that discriminatory viewpoints are not ness, forcefulness, ambition and desire for responsibility.
necessarily intentionally adopted (Agars, 2004). By contrast, women are associated with qualities related to
Gender stereotyping persists despite the provision of concern for the sympathetic treatment of others. These
equal opportunities in workplaces. Though an improvement include being affectionate, helpful, friendly, kind and sym-
has occurred, with increasing numbers of women acquiring pathetic, as well as interpersonally sensitive, gentle and
various management positions in the workplace, Schein’s soft-spoken (Eagly & Carli, 2007). Kanter (1977) mentions
(1973) Think Manager–Think Male attitude is still very that women in boardrooms may be regarded as ‘token
much in existence among men. However, Schein’s (1973) females’ rather than as board members in their own right.
Think Manager–Think Male association is attenuated in Women, who are usually a minority in boardrooms, are
the case of successful companies and Think Crisis–Think often not listened to or valued on equal terms with male
Female is noticed being associated with female leaders. board members. Brescoll (2016) found that the participants
Women’s perceived suitability for senior positions is likely in study considered the decisions of female leaders to be
to increase under conditions of organizational crisis (Ryan, driven by emotions and therefore; they are less interested
Alexander, & Postmes, 2007). in hiring women in leadership positions. Similarly,
Women continue to experience high levels of pressure Fischbach, Lichtenthaler and Hosrtmann (2015), investi-
from their jobs, and they have been found to experience gating the Think Manager–Think Male paradigm, found
high levels of mental ill-health when they utilize an that the emotions displayed by successful managers are the
interpersonally oriented leadership style in male-dominated same as the emotions considered to be characteristic of
industries (Gardiner & Tiggemann, 1999). Gender-specific men as opposed to women. The above discussion shows
behaviour demotivates and demoralizes women in the the stereotypical views on women as managers.
workplace. In organizational settings, negative beliefs Over more than four decades, a number of researchers
about women’s performance or efficacy may damage their have explored gender stereotypes and requisite management
aspiration for career advancement (Dickerson & Taylor, characteristics (Heilman, Block, Martell, & Simon, 1989;
2000). Women may opt not to apply due to challenging or Brenner, Tomkiewicz, & Schein, 1989; Schein & Muller,
leadership roles if they fear that they lack the ability to 1992; Orser, 1994; Schein, Mueller, Lituchy, & Liu, 1996;
perform such roles. Elsaid & Elsaid, 2012; Berkery, Morley, & Tiernan, 2013)
The challenges women face due to gender stereotypes following different paradigms of gender stereotyping to
can be devastating. For example, Singh and Sebastian undertake research in different country contexts. The
(2018) in their state-wide study of Gujarat, India found that findings of these studies show that the stereotyping reported
women’s main links to entrepreneurship are through the in the earlier studies continue to persist. Both men and
business occupations of their fathers and kinfolk. The women believe that men are more suitable than women in
process of their inclusion into the family enterprise is a leadership positions, though this belief is endorsed more
matter of birth, not choice; and despite the exposure of by men than by women. The findings also indicate that the
these women to business practices, as women, they are not Think Manager–Think Male mindset is a global
regarded as potential successors in business. Moreover, the phenomenon. A change in women’s perception has been
194 IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review 10(2)
noticed in recent studies mainly in the USA where women consequences of gender stereotyping and its impact on
have been less inclined to view management as the domain women’s career progressions. The thematic narrative was
of men (Powell, 2011). Similarly, Stoker, Van der Velde developed and classified based on conceptual frameworks2
and Lemmers (2012) found that although the general around individual, cognitive, family, social, cultural and
stereotype of a manager is masculine and although most organizational factors of gender stereotyping. Table-1 was
prefer a man as a manager, female employees, employees designed to reflect the structure, categorization and analysis
with a female manager and employees working in an of arguments within existing literature. The scope of the
organization with a high percentage of female managers research is generic by nature but focuses more on South
have a stronger preference for feminine managerial Asian contexts.
characteristics and female managers. The above discussion Methodologically, the paper belongs within a tradition
shows that socio-cultural factors play a significant role in of critical thematic content analysis of gender stereotyping.
increasing or reducing the level of adherence to stereotyped It engages with contextual interpretation of relevant
modes of cognition and that individual-level agency is
theories to avoid overlapping in the paper. The following
required to change societal structures of gender inequality.
paragraphs discuss some of the relevant theories followed
by the themes/factors. The theorisation of individual-level
agency in changing societal structures of gender-inequality
Methodological Approach seems a missing piece in multi-level research on gendered
This paper is a conceptual paper based on a review stereotypes in management. Therefore, it is essential to
of literature. It draws its methodological lineages to understand relevant theories in relation to different themes/
non-linear narrative around the concept and construction of factors of gender stereotyping. We hope that social role
the idea and language of ‘gender stereotyping’. The paper theory, role-congruity theory and moderate feminist theory
uses discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to identify ways will ultimately prove valuable in achieving an understanding
in which gender stereotypes are incorporated within the of the social stereotypes and prejudices women face in
language of management praxis by reviewing existing society and organizations and will also serve to guide
literature. The literature review is conducted by selecting social and organizational interventions that can prevent the
and synthesizing1 existing literature on the causes and development of gender stereotypes.
Table 1. Theorisation of Different Antecedents of Gender Stereotyping in South Asia and Beyond.
Antecedents Authors Theories

Physical and Johnson & Redmond (2000); Bigler & Developmental intergroup theory
Demographic Liben (2006); Grunspan et al. (2016) (Bigler & Liben, 2006)
Individual Factors
differences Self-categorization theories (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher &

Wetherell, 1987)
Social identity
(Tajfel & Turner, 1986)
Threat to self- Spencer & Fein (1994); Wolfe et Automaticity
esteem al. (1995); Owuamalam & Zagefka (Spencer & Fein, 1994; Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996).
(2014); Inesi & Cable (2015); Williams Signalling theory with concept of gender hierarchy threat
& Tiedens (2016) (Inesi & Cable, 2015)
Categorization of Operario & Fiske (2001); Bell (2007); Stereotypes are maintained by various memory processes
information Amodio (2014); Ellemers (2018) (Stangor & Duan, 1991; Macrae et al., 1993;Von Hippel et al.,
Cognitive
Factors
1995).
Generalization of Macrae et al. (1994); Canal et al. Non-conscious detection of co-variation
information (2015) (Hill et al., 1989; Cacioppo et al., 1992; Hilton & Von Hippel,
1996).
Family Upbringing Adorno et al. (1950); Fagot et al. Developmental intergroup theory
(1992); Endendijk et al. (2014). (Bigler & Liben, 2006).
Family Factors
Socialisation based Bruner (1957); McKenzie-Mohr Theory of Priming

on past experience & Zanna, (1990); Sedikides & (Bruner, 1957; Sherman et al 1990; Smith et al.,1992; Skowronski
Skowronski (1991); Bartsch & Judd et al. 1993)
(1993); Rudman & Borgida (1995); Out-group homogeneity (Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996; Gupta,
Ellemers (2018) Turban, Wasti & Sikdar, 2009; Li Kusterer, Lindholm &
Montgomery, 2013).
(Table 1 continued)
(Table 1 continued)
Antecedents Authors Theories

Social and Cultural Stapel & Noordewier (2011); Cuddy System justification theory (Stapel & Noordewier, 2011).
Socio-Cultural Factors
Status Quo et al. (2015).

Society’s expectation Cabrera et al. (2009); MacNell et al. Role-congruity theory
(2015). (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Cabrera et al., 2009).
Culture Hinton (2000); Manwa (2002); Hinton Attribution process
(2016). (Kanazawa, 1992; Bell-Dolan & Anderson, 1999).
Education Trusty (2002); Sayman (2007); Eagly Social role theory
& Wood (2013); Islam & Asadullah (Eagly,1987)
(2018).
Status of women at Green & Casell (1996); Operario & Theory of self-fulfilling prophecies
workplace Fiske (2001); Gilbert et al. (2010); (Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996; Chen & Bargh, 1997).
Organisational Factors
Latu, Mast & Stewart (2015).

Gender specific Ball & Brewis (2008); Koch, D’Mello & Role congruity theory
behaviour at Sackett (2015). (Koch, D’Mello & Sackett, 2015).
workplace
Organizational Grobler et al. (2006); Schmitt & Wirth Social identity theory
culture (2009) (Hogg, 2001; Ryan, Alexander Haslam & Postmes, 2007).
In-group favouritism Gorman (2005); Ryan, Alexander Role congruity theory (Cuadrado, García-Ael, & Molero, 2015).
at workplace Haslam & Postmes (2007); Cuadrado, Social identity theory (Ryan, Alexander Haslam & Postmes, 2007).
García-Ael & Molero (2015) The Conflict theory
(Gorman, 2005).
Source: The authors.
Theorizing Gender Stereotyping in Theory of Social Role, Gender

Management Stereotypes and Management
Gender stereotyping owes its origin to the gendered Social role theory is considered to be significant in explain-
division of labour whereby the means of production and ing the existence of gender stereotyping. According to this
distribution is controlled by men within a patriarchal social, theory, managers have expectations about candidates relat-
economic and cultural structure. Socialization of ing to behavioural tendencies and activities which are con-
individuals, families and other institutions within such a cordant with their social roles and which can be based on
structure is central to the creation and perpetuation of gender, economic standing or other demographic subsets
gender stereotypes (Ruble, Martin, & Berenbaum, 2006). (Skelly & Johnson, 2011). Social role theory explains that
There are theoretical attempts to break away from such a men and women acting in accordance with their social
system by challenging existing patriarchal norms and roles are often segregated along gender lines and that this
values based on gender stereotypes with the help of ‘theory functions to confirm gender stereotypes (Eagly, 1987,
of mind’. Theory of mind offers a social cognitive basis to 1997; Koenig & Eagly, 2014). Because women are more
challenge gender stereotypes (Mulvey, Rizzo, & Killen, involved in caregiving work, the characteristics ascribed to
2015). However, the cognitive approach of everyday life is them are those of being nurturing, caring, and concerned
shaped by the environment where cognition takes place. with personal relationships. By contrast, men are typically
Therefore, theory of mind is not sufficient to counter seen by society as exhibiting masculine characteristics,
different factors influencing gender stereotypes. As Hinton such as leadership, strength and assertiveness (Vogel,
(2016) emphasizes, in Lippmann’s view (1992), it is not Wester, Heesacker, & Madon, 2003; Skelly & Johnson,
the individual but the culture which is responsible for 2011). Candidates required for managerial positions are
creating stereotypes. Similarly, Fiske and Taylor (2013) expected to have technical and rational expertise along
suggest that stereotyping should be considered as ‘culture with an acceptable level of attributes which are perceived
in mind’, that is to say, it should be viewed as a characteristic as masculine and those applicants who are more qualified
of the cognition of cultural groups rather than as a cognitive and who are better able to fulfil the social expectations of a
bias affecting individuals. leader will be favoured more by the hiring manager.
Women may be perceived by some managers or executives discrimination and remain scarce at the senior management
as not possessing enough of the male-type or leadership positions. For example, Al-Manasra (2013) points out how
qualities required for promotion to senior-level positions the employees in a male-cultured organization in Jordan
and this may hamper their progress (Skelly & Johnson, are influenced to perceive men as always performing better
2011). A study undertaken by Akanbi and Salami (2011) than women. Stereotyped belief is also visible in Islamic
found that women’s career advancement in management traditions like Iran where, due to the belief that women are
faces obstacles and limitations and gender-related precon- emotional, they usually get excluded from leadership posi-
ceptions and biases, stereotypes and feelings about wom- tions (Ghorbani & Tung, 2007). Furthermore, the stereo-
en’s managerial and administrative abilities were believed typed perception that women lack effective leadership
to be the reason for these inhibitions. Surprisingly, it was characteristics is a consistent characteristic of Thai corpo-
found that the majority of the respondents prefer to work rations and causes women to experience barriers to career
for men rather than women because women were consid- progressions (Napasri & Yukongdi, 2015). Yang (2011)
ered as hard to work. The analysis also suggested that identifies the persistence of similar gender-stereotyped
women managers were seen to lag behind their male coun- images of women in organizations in China.
terparts in terms of possessing some significant attributes
needed in managerial job performance and success.
Therefore, the existence of stereotyping against females in Feminism and Gender Stereotypes
leadership positions are proposed by the social role theory
(Lyness & Heilman, 2006; Skelly & Johnson, 2011). Jain The third wave of feminism seeks to examine the construc-
and Mukherji (2010) focus on the struggle of women to tion of gender and experiences of women within different
fulfil the roles of being a wife, a mother and a successful areas of gender social order where masculinity and femi-
manager. They go on to highlight the impact of societal ninity are being exchanged (Budgeon, 2012). McRobbie
norms and traditions in creating gender roles for men and (2009) suggests that empowered and independent working
women in India where male characteristics are accepted as women are considered to be a symbol of progressive
successful managerial characteristics and female charac- femininity. However, Gill (2007) points out that self-
teristics are resisted. Bombuwela and Alwis (2013) have improvement and self-discipline are key features of wom-
discussed how the career development of women is affected en’s access to freedom and empowerment. McRobbie
by the culture in Sri Lanka. Jamali, Sidani, & Safieddine (2009) adds that success and failure are therefore under-
(2005) mention cultural constraints in Lebanon and Pillai, stood to be the responsibility of individuals and structural
Prasad and Thomas (2011) draw attention to the existence concerns are dismissed. Lewis (2012) emphasized on the
of social prejudice against women in Bahrain. masculinity and femininity aspects attached to the third
wave of feminism. Women are suggested to be careful in
engaging in feminine displays that benefit the business and
Role Congruity Theory, Leadership and not involve in unwarranted feminine demonstrations. As
Gender Stereotypes Lewis (2014) reveals, feminine behaviour exhibited by
women is not accepted in positions governed by masculine
The role congruity theory developed by Eagly and Karau norms of conduct. A notable issue here is that women
(2002) suggests that as leadership skills are ascribed more adopting a post-feminist approach might face rejection due
to men than to women, a prejudice exists against prospective to hyper-feminine characteristics. This rejection would
female leaders. attach to them as individuals rather than to their minority
status within the workplace. This suppression of structural
Because women who are effective leaders tend to violate constraints is caused by socio-cultural issues (Bauman,
standards for their gender when they manifest male- 2001). Unlike developed countries where women have a
stereotypical, agentic attributes and fail to manifest female-
stereotypical, communal attributes, they may be unfavourably
powerful voice and have attained senior positions in organ-
evaluated for their gender role violation, at least by those who izations, in developing countries women tend to take more
endorse traditional gender roles. (Eagly & Karau, 2002, p. 575) of a moderate feminist approach and in most cases, are
silent (Khayria & Feki, 2015). Male dominance and cul-
Heilman (2001) stated that the female gender role contrasts tural barriers are still very much a reality in many countries
with the leader role whilst the male gender role is consist- (IBR, 2017). The lowest-performing region on gender
ent with the leader role. Dambrin and Lambert (2012) fur- equality was found to be South-Asia with a score of 0.44,
ther added that even stronger causes to increase women whilst North America and Oceania scored 0.74 to be the
in the workforce feel weak as women continue to face best performing region. For example, in a country like
Bangladesh, cultural, family and religious issues usually tics such as colour, race, age, nationality, marital status,
dominate women’s lives and there is a rigid division of education or upbringing, individuals will have particular
labour in the workplace that controls their mobility and norms, values and modes of behaviour (Johnson &
sexuality. The patriarchal social system and upbringing Redmond, 2000; Bigler & Liben, 2006). Bigler and Liben
teach women to be self-sacrificing and to accept unequal (2006) show that perceptually discriminable characteristics
treatment in life without complaint (Sogra, 1995). However, of people are more likely to become the foundation of ste-
a change has been noticed in recent years with increasing reotyping. Developmental intergroup theory (Bigler &
participation of women in the workplace, which is affect- Liben, 2006) suggested that once a categorization based on
ing the present condition of Bangladeshi society (Sogra, certain factors becomes prominent, people tend to interpret
2014). The new wave of feminist theory aims to recognize new information received along the same dimension of cat-
the present behaviour of women in different organizations egorization, thereby triggering the process of stereotyping.
and management cultures within different societal, eco- Women employees tend to face discrimination due to being
nomic, cultural and religious conditions. categorized by their gender dimension and this hampers
their career progressions.
Different Factors and Lineages of Gender Threat to self-esteem. People are likely to stereotype when
they experience a threat to their self-esteem. It can be an
Stereotyping
automatic response as stated by the automaticity theory
There are several aspects that are essential to consider (Spencer & Fein, 1994; Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996). Inesi
when categorizing the factors of gender stereotyping. For and Cable (2015) used signalling theory and investigated
instance, stereotypes are reflected in people’s beliefs and whether evaluators give worse performance evaluations to
expectations about social groups (Eagly & Wood, 2013). women with stronger competence signals than they do to
However, even if there are differences between these women with weaker competence signals. Across four stud-
groups, the overall perceived differences are not applicable ies, data were collected from US military officers, college-
to all individuals in each group. It can be said that although educated adults living in the US and male and female
socio-cultural factors have a significant impact on individ- adults from a business school in London, UK. The findings
ual thinking and organizational context, biological differ- strongly suggested that women receive biased evaluations
ences and cognitive factors play an important role in for strong competence signals as evaluators are threatened
shaping individuals’ beliefs. The cognitive factors as by their status incongruence. Some supervisors may per-
Barreto and Ellemers (2015) suggested that the motiva- ceive stronger competence signals as a threat to the gender
tional processes that make individuals conform to gender hierarchy and provide lower performance evaluations as a
stereotyping. It is the result of individual differences in result. On the other hand, female supervisors who display
preferences and abilities or reflects biological differences. leadership in a feminine manner are less likely to stimulate
These gender differences are embedded in people’s brains threat responses in their male subordinates (Williams
and deeply rooted in the society’s growth reflecting the & Tiedens, 2016). This shows that threats to self-esteem
different roles of men and women (Ellemers, 2018). can be an antecedent but also a consequence of gender
stereotyping.
Individual Factors
Cognitive Factors
Physical and demographic differences. Human beings’
physical differences such as race and gender can cause ste- Categorization of information. People usually give greater
reotypes. For instance, Grunspan, Eddy, Brownell and consideration to observations that match their stereotypical
Wiggins (2016) states that in a biology course, even when beliefs than they do to counter-stereotypical observations
female students actually achieved higher grades, male stu- when they process information (Ellemers, 2018). The
dents were still considered to outshine them and were specific brain areas that help people to identify, interpret
named by peers as being knowledgeable about the course and remember things that they see, hear and learn are
content. Due to this perception, people tend to self- activated by the stereotypical expectations that they possess
categorize themselves into different categories as sug- (Amodio, 2014). Similarly, Operario and Fiske (2001)
gested by social identity theory and self-categorization argue that a static generalization of a group as a result of
theory (Hornsey, 2008). Stereotyping takes place when stereotyping. It is often indicated bias and inequality, stem
people have expectations that because of some characteris- from categorization. Supporting this idea, Bell (2007)
states that stereotyping occurs when people categorize and the kinds of personalities that develop in a society (Adorno,
then evaluate the person categorized. Moreover, stereotypes Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford 1950).
are maintained by various memory processes (Stangor &
Duan, 1991; Macrae, Hewstone, & Griffiths, 1993; Von Socialization based on past experience. Past experiences
Hippel, Sekaquaptewa, & Vargas, 1995). Employers tend play an important role in the formation of stereotypes. In
to evaluate women candidates based on their gender and this context, group stereotyping, prejudice and
not their skills, hampering the progression of women discrimination might be critically associated with
employees. perceptions of out-group homogeneity (Diehl & Jonas,
1991) and theory of priming (Bruner, 1957; Sherman,
Generalization. Generalization from the behaviour of one Mackie, & Driscoll, 1990; Smith, Stewart, & Buttram,
group member to the evaluation of others is one possible 1992; Skowronski, Carlston, & Isham, 1993). Out-group
route to stereotype formation, which can be best explained members are perceived to hold less suitable traits than
using the theory of non-conscious detection of co-variation. in-group members and are considered to be more
The process of co-variation detection is suggested to be a homogeneous (Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996). The minority
non-conscious one (Hilton & Von Hippel, 1996). Once groups (women) are considered as more homogeneous
non-conscious initiation of a possible relation between two than majority groups, an effect that holds even in minority
events is made, people tend to behave in the same manner group members’ impressions of the members of their own
even after the possibility has long been removed (Hill, group (Bartsch & Judd, 1993). Similarly, there is a
Lewicki, Czyzewska, & Boss 1989). The role of non- stereotypical perception that on average men are taller than
conscious detection of co-variation in forming stereotypes women although this is not the case for every individual
tends to be influenced by self-perpetuating effects. and this stereotypical belief leads people to underestimate
Similarly, Canal, Garnham and Oakhill (2015) found that the disparities within the groups and to overestimate the
people are likely to interpolate information about unknown differences between the groups (Ellemers, 2018). Priming,
others that is consistent with gender stereotypes where variously known as category accessibility or implicit
information about specific individuals is scarce. memory occurs when current perception and cognition gets
influenced by past experiences by making certain categories
more accessible during the analysis of incoming
information (Bruner, 1957). Therefore, it can be assumed
Family Factors
that priming a particular domain makes people more likely
Family upbringing. The way people are brought up causes to use that domain in later evaluations, even if the earlier
stereotypes. It could be difficult to change stereotyped priming experience is completely irrelevant to the current
thinking which is embedded from childhood. Fagot, task (Sherman, Mackie, & Driscoll, 1990).
Leinbach and O’Boyle (1992) suggest that gender
stereotyping is acquired at a very young age and the
identification of genders is heavily influenced by social Socio-Cultural Factors
interactions and associations. Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Social and cultural status quo. Stapel and Noordewier
Levinson and Sanford (1950) suggest that the personality (2011) use the system justification theory to give an account
development of a child mainly happens in the family of the way in which people usually stereotype. It is easier for
setting but is heavily influenced by social factors. A child’s people to gender stereotype in order to maintain their
personality is shaped by his/her parents’ behaviour towards perception of a fair world and to defend the patriarchal social
him/her and society has an immense impact on the parents’ system and the status quo dominated by men. People
behaviour. Girls and boys are likely to be treated differently stereotype because stereotypes are convenient tools which
by parents who implicitly make gender-stereotypical permit them to blame poor people by stating that they are
associations, and in this way, children learn about gender just lazy and to admire the rich people by stating that they
stereotyping at an early age and reproduce it in their own simply work hard. The existence of male versus female
behaviours (Endendijk et al., 2014). Through this process, stereotypes clarifies the stereotyping experiences of women.
children learn to recognize the target groups of stereotyping Stereotypes aid people in understanding and provide
as explained by the developmental intergroup theory meaning to social behaviour. Moreover, attribution processes
(Bigler & Liben, 2006). Parents’ behaviour towards their contribute to maintaining stereotypes. As Cuddy et al. (2015)
children is usually affected by several factors—mainly found, the likelihood of individualism being associated with
economic, but also social, ethnic and religious. Therefore, the stereotype of men is predicted by the degree of national
broad changes in social conditions and institutions affect acceptance of individualism versus collectivism.
Society’s expectation. Society’s expectation regarding Organizational Factors

women’s role is consistent with role congruity theory
(Eagly & Karau, 2002). Cabrera et al. (2009) argue that as Organizational culture. Organizations play an important
a result of women being allocated to household work and role in influencing stereotypes. ‘Stereotypes are responsive
men to paid work roles, women and men actively develop to human intent, so they can be held in check with personal
skills. Society then accepts these skills as being normative motivation and social norms created in organizations’
and they are incorporated into fundamental gender roles, (Operario & Fiske, 2001, p. 46). Although stereotypes are
which are both descriptive and prescriptive in defining initially formed in childhood and schooling, workplaces
how women and men typically do and should behave. This influence the development of stereotypes through various
process leads to biases against women. In particular, it practices such as recruitment, promotion and the culture of
results in lower expectations of women’s potential for the organization. Social identity theory suggests that the
leadership because leadership abilities are associated with social groups feel a sense of belonging and consider their
group culture as a source of pride and self-esteem (Hogg,
being male. This is also evidenced in a study by MacNell,
2001; Ryan, Alexander Haslam, & Postmes, 2007). Schmitt
Driscoll and Hunt (2015) where the behaviour of teachers
and Wirth (2009) claim that stereotyping is promoted in the
during an online course was rated more highly by the
workplace through the division of labour according to
evaluators when the instructor was identified by a male
gender. This suggests that the gendered division of labour
name instead of a female name.
influences stereotyping to justify the division of labour.
Grobler et al. (2006) bring out an important characteristic
Culture. Culture plays an essential role in the formation of
of the causes of stereotyping by suggesting that stereotypes
stereotyping. People’s perceptions of traits that are
do not stem from individual experiences but usually come
connected to each gender and essential to get appointed
from outside sources. The authors state that stereotypes
into senior management positions are influenced by culture
require that exaggerated views about a group are sustained
(Manwa, 2002; Hinton, 2016). Culture affects how people
by confirmations from the social environment. For instance,
make attributions. Attribution processes are expected to be
when overstated beliefs about how women are perceived to
instigated by behaviours rather than being influenced by
perform in the workplace are repeatedly recounted, they
prior experiences (Kanazawa, 1992; Bell-Dolan &
produce or sustain stereotypical attitudes; and the impact
Anderson, 1999). Gender stereotyping of managerial of this stereotyping limits people’s potential and negates
positions has been examined by numerous authors in their individuality.
different country contexts such as the USA (Schein et al.,
1989), Germany and the UK (Schein & Muller, 1992), Status of women in the workplace. Women in workplaces
Canada (Orser, 1994), Japan and the Peoples’ Republic of are usually perceived as emotional, illogical and intuitive
China (Schein et al., 1996) and New Zealand (Sauers, decision makers (Green & Casell, 1996). Gilbert, Burnett,
Kennedy, & O’Sullivan, 2002). Men in all seven countries Phau and Haar (2010) suggest that in different countries,
considered characteristics necessary for management work preferences differ between male and female
success to be attributes more commonly ascribed to men in professionals. The embedded social stereotype of women
general than to women in general. This established a strong as intuitive decision makers could have been influenced by
and robust tendency for leadership to be viewed as the different preferences women possess compared to those
culturally masculine. However, women in USA and Canada of men in a workplace setting. This concern for women
were found to perceive attributes of both men and women being considered as intuitive decision makers is consistent
to be necessary for management success. with the expectancy-driven model of behavioural
confirmation effects (self-fulfilling prophecies) (Chen &
Education. Despite educational reforms and curriculum Bargh, 1997).
modifications intended to incorporate equal conceptions of
occupational identification for boys and girls, differences Gender specific behaviour in the workplace. Perceptions
in what is expected from each sex are as glaring today as of different work preferences of women and men and
they were decades ago. This is consistent with social role justifications of women’s behaviour were identified as
theory (Eagly, 1987; Eagly & Wood, 2013). Such attitudes causes of stereotypes. Privileges offered to women, such as
are powerfully perpetuated both in the classroom and in the the ascription of less risky projects or the provision of the
textbooks students read (Islam & Asadullah, 2018). nearest parking spaces can cause stereotypes. For example,
Teachers possess an unparalleled authority to construct stereotyping can be caused by the approach taken by a
social reality but are often not fully aware of the powerful company to support the career advancement of women,
effects of their actions (Sayman, 2007). which might in fact result in women withdrawing from the
paths leading to career success. People tend to perceive Disparate treatment. Bell (2007) explores the impact of
that the part-time jobs are designed for mothers and gender stereotyping, looking specifically at disparate
therefore, people take up these roles have less opportunity treatment. The author affirms that stereotypes regarding
to succeed (Ball & Brewis, 2008). This discussion is performance or competencies of people may cause
supported by role congruity theory (Koch, D’Mello, & disparate treatment or unintentional discrimination,
Sackett, 2015), which suggests that attitudes are less meaning the differential treatment of certain employees
positive towards female than male leaders and potential because of involvement in a negatively stereotyped group.
leaders; besides, it is more difficult for women to become For example, the assumption that women are not competent
leaders and to achieve success in leadership roles. in calculation or maths could lead to disparate treatment,
with women not being assigned to jobs requiring maths
In-group favouritism in the workplace. In-group favouritism skills. Similarly, gender stereotypes implicitly guiding
influences the formation of stereotypes. A small number of people’s judgement impact the job and career opportunities
for women. Unfortunately, unlike men, women, when they
new women are hired when the selection criteria include a
become a parent, are assumed to be likely to prioritize care
large number of stereotypically masculine characteristics.
for their children over commitment at work (Ellemers
Similarly, more women are hired when the selection criteria
et al., 2018). It can be said that disparate treatment is an
include more feminine characteristics. Moreover, more
antecedent as well as a consequence of gender stereotyping.
women are likely to get hired when the decision makers are
female than male but this effect gets reduced among enter- Prejudice. Cabrera, Sauer and Thomas-Hunt (2009) exam-
level hires as more women start to fill the higher ranking ine the impact of stereotyping using role congruity theory
positions moving towards gender equality (Gorman, 2005). to explain how women leaders may be perceived differ-
As social identity theory (Ryan, Alexander Haslam & ently from men across varying industry contexts.
Postmes, 2007) suggests that people tend to categorize Perceptions of the incongruity of women’s attributes with
themselves and others into various social categories and those associated with leaders result in lower expectations
this is the reason why people belonging to different social of women’s potential for leadership and lower evaluations
groups can have a conflict of interests and opinion as of female leaders’ actual behaviour. As Zahidi and Ibarra,
suggested by the conflict theory (Gorman, 2005). This is (2010) suggested, the gender, racial and cultural composi-
also evidenced in the role congruity theory (Cuadrado, tion of the board of directors faced by the managers, direc-
García-Ael, & Molero, 2015) which suggests the prejudice tors and shareholders of the modern corporation continues
prospective women candidates face towards their journey to be the most significant contemporary governance issues.
to leadership positions.
Tokenism. Bilimoria, Godwin and Zelechowski (2007)
refer to tokenism as one of the negative consequences of
gender stereotyping. The authors found that women in
Impact of Gender Stereotyping on
managerial positions still face tokenism from their male
Women in the Workplace counterparts. The factors influencing tokenism, according
to the authors, are discriminatory visibility, polarization
Organizations play a key role in propagating discrimination.
and assimilation. A study by Gatrell and Cooper (2007)
The judgments made by personnel in organizations
exploring the association between tokenism and gender
regarding selecting and hiring of female applicants are
stereotyping found that as women managers progress to
affected by gender stereotyping (Davison & Burke, 2000).
higher positions they are more likely to experience
tokenism and that the first woman to progress often
Stereotype threat. Stereotype threat is the unpleasant
experiences discrimination and stereotyping from the
recognition that one can be judged in terms of a negative
majority group.
stereotype or indeed that one might in some way appear to
confirm a negative stereotype because the stereotype Women are emotionally unstable, weak and timid. Heilman
appears personally pertinent, perhaps in providing an (2001) emphasizes that men are considered to be
apparent explanation of one’s behaviour or an experience emotionally strong, assertive and workplace achievers
one is having (Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002). In other whereas women are often considered to be emotionally
words, stereotype threat arises when an individual unstable, weak and timid. These attitudes were found to be
anticipates the prospect of being judged or treated exemplified in a study conducted by Zafarullah (2000)
negatively based on the negative perception of his or her looking at the status of women in workplaces in Bangladesh.
group (Goff, Steele, & Davies, 2008). The author observed discriminatory attitudes prevailing in
the organizations, including the perception that women are Consequences of violating the descriptive and prescriptive
less capable physically, mentally and emotionally in elements of gender stereotypes. The consequences of
confronting certain challenges, being temperamental and violating the descriptive and prescriptive elements of
lacking in motivation. gender stereotypes are discussed by Heilman (2001).
Firstly, women face devaluation of performance because of
Women are risk-averse. Maxfield, Shapiro, Gupta and Hass gender stereotyping. Women are perceived due to
(2010) claim that it is a common belief in the business stereotypical expectation as incapable of being successful
world that women are risk-averse but argue on the basis of when they do manly work. When women do in fact succeed,
their findings that women are in fact not risk-averse, but disconfirming the stereotype, evaluators tend to devalue
are able to embrace risk. The authors found that women are women’s performance by interpreting the same behaviour
seen as risk-averse as risk-taking is unrecognized because differently depending upon who the actor is. Secondly,
they mitigate costs when undertaking risk. Role-congruent stereotypes affect women’s performance by denying credit
behaviour contributes to the perception that women are to women for their successes. Women are often viewed as
risk-averse. incapable of succeeding in a male work domain even when
their successes are undeniable. The expectation that a
Women are intuitive decision makers. Women managers at woman will fail is maintained by treating instances of
workplaces are viewed as emotional and illogical whilst success as not being due to the woman herself or by
men are believed to exhibit gender-neutral rationality and regarding a women’s success as an exception that depended
decision-making (Green & Casell, 1996). However, a study upon exceptional circumstances. Finally, women
conducted by Hayes et al. (2004) on intuition and women succeeding in male-typed jobs are personally derogated
managers, found that there is no difference between male and seen as counter-communal. Women are thus penalized
and female managers in terms of intuitive decision-making, for violating prescriptive aspects of stereotypes and often
disproving the perception that women managers are more disliked and considered as unfeminine (Heilman, 2001).
intuitive than their male counterparts. Supporting this
argument, Robbins and Judge (2007) report that women Think Manager–Think Male. Schein (2007) emphasizes
tend to over-analyse problems before making decisions, the importance of the Think Manager–Think Male
contrary to the stereotyped perception of women as
perspective as one of the most common stereotypes at
intuitive decision makers. Moreover, a study conducted by
workplaces fostering bias against women in managerial
Gilbert, Burnett, Phau and Haar (2010) to examine the
selection, placement, promotion and training decisions.
differences between male and female business professionals
The author states that the persistent stereotype which
in USA, Jamaica and Australia found that in different
associates management with being male is one of the main
countries male and female professionals have different
hurdles for women in management in all countries. Schein
work preferences. It is tempting to conclude from this that
(1973) initiated research into the Think Manager–Think
the embedded stereotype of women as intuitive decision
Male attitude by developing an index containing 92
makers is influenced by the differing preferences of women
descriptive terms and instructions to test the relationship
and men in workplace settings.
between gender role stereotypes and requisite management
Anger is not feminine. Brescoll and Uhlmann (2008) characteristics. The findings of the study confirmed that
examine the relationship between anger, gender and status there is a relationship between gender role stereotypes and
conferral. The authors note that emotion theorists have perceptions of requisite management characteristics,
argued that the expression of certain emotions, such as especially among male respondents. This suggested that
anger, can convey whether an individual is capable and is people usually associate men candidates with managerial
eligible for high social status. Moreover, as stated by roles and that therefore women face biased treatment when
Heilman (2001), women and men who do not exhibit the seeking to enter and advance in management positions. A
culturally expected womanly or manly attributes are number of studies such as Brenner, Tomkiewicz and Schein
viewed unfavourably and evaluated as psychologically (1989), Heilman et al. (1989), Schein and Muller (1992),
unhealthy by people who do exhibit these gendered Schein et al. (1996), Fullagar et al. (2003), Jackson,
attributes. Expressions of anger by men in a professional Engstrom and Emmers-Sommer (2007), Elsaid and Elsaid
context are seen as appropriate conduct in a higher status (2012) and Berkery, Morley and Tiernan (2013) have
role, whereas women’s expressions of anger are viewed as replicated Schein’s (1973) study and confirmed the
inconsistent with high social status and accordingly, functioning of the Think Manager–Think Male perspective
women who express anger in a professional context are with slight variations in either description, place of study,
regarded as less competent (Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2008). participants’ profile or seating arrangements.
Think Manager–Think Male is considered to be a global adequately analyse and address issues of gender stereo-
phenomenon, suggesting that leadership positions have types in management. These are (a) Women in Management,
traditionally and historically been believed to be a male (b) Women and Management and (c) Gender and
domain (Schein et al., 1996). A research study by Mirza Management. The theoretical transition from Women in
and Jabeen (2011) in South Asian countries contributes to Management to Women and Management led the concep-
the limited literature on the impact of gender stereotyping. tual shift to address the issues of gender stereotyping and
The study looks specifically at the banking sector in its impact on women’s career progressions in different lev-
Pakistan, examining the influence of gender stereotypes on els of management environment.
women bankers in management positions and finds that The first conceptual shift started with the publication of
stereotypes have a negative impact on perceptions of the journal Women in Management Review in 1985. From
women in management (Mirza & Jabeen, 2011). As in 1985 onwards, the advocates of Women in Management
other developing nations, stereotypical views of women’s argued that positive actions (Cooper, 1985) based on equal
role in society and public affairs are quite commonly held opportunities (Marshall, 1985) are essential to the realiza-
in Bangladesh. Gender stereotyping results in differing tion of the full potential of women in management. Such
attitudes towards men and women in diverse industries and steps are necessary for the mainstreaming of women in
service sectors in Bangladesh. A study undertaken by management and to tackle gender stereotyping. This theo-
Zafarullah (2000), looking at Bangladesh, reported that retical narrative is based on the premise of higher represen-
performance appraisal systems were heavily prejudiced tation and more participation of women in management.
and often contained inconsistent remarks or statements. This approach regards women as a target group and aspires
However, several antecedents and consequences are to capture the untapped labour-power of women for mana-
overlapping and considering them under the antecedent and gerial productivity. As part of this process, it is envisaged
consequence umbrella helped to broaden knowledge. It pro- that gender stereotypes will be removed. The Women in
vided a holistic overview of the factors of gender stereotyp- Management approach was criticized because while it
ing. Recent studies suggest that contemporary women are helped towards greater participation of women in manage-
typically viewed as agentic beings rather than as communal ment and greater gender equality, it did not adequately
beings. It is worth empirically testing the impact of the ante- address the issue of gender stereotyping. As a result, gen-
cedents of gender stereotyping on the women’s changed der stereotyping remained a major barrier to women’s pro-
attitude. Agentic characteristics are more associated with gress in management worldwide (Schein, 2007).
masculinity than with femininity (Diekman & Goodfriend, The Women in Management was an initial step to move
2006; Garcia-Retamero, Muller, & Lopez-Zafra, away from the society’s expectation (Cabrera, Sauer, &
2011; Bosak, Eagly, Diekman, & Sczesny, 2017). Although Thomas-Hunt, 2009), family upbringing (Fagot, Leinbach,
the perceived change in agency has been stated to be the & O’Boyle, 1992), education (Sayman, 2007) and cultural
reason for women’s increased participation in the labour barrier (Hinton, 2000) allowing women to participate in the
market and very demanding roles. It is important to con- workplace. As Schien (2007) emphasized the Think
sider how the factors impacted in this shift will provide Manager–Think Male phenomenon was persistent and
newer information and perspectives. Koenig and Eagly reflected in the organizational culture (Grobler et al.,
(2005) suggest that while gender stereotypes do prevent 2006). Women were categorized (Operario and Fiske,
people from excelling in counter-stereotypical domains, 2001) based on their physical and demographic differences
they also help people to perform well in domains which are (Johnson & Redmond, 2000). As a result, women faced
endorsed as gender-appropriate by stereotypical attitudes. disparate treatment (Bell, 2007), prejudice (Zahidi and
In order to overcome the negative motivational impacts of Ibarra, 2010) and victim of stereotype threat (Steele,
gender stereotyping, extra effort is needed from individuals Spencer, & Aronson, 2002).
(Ellemers et al., 2018). Change will happen when women The second conceptual shift took place in response to
are provided with enough support to develop resilience the failures of Women in Management with the development
skills in organizations and a larger number of women are of the theory of Women and Management during the 1990s.
visible in leadership roles (Tabassum et al., 2019). Crampton and Mishra (1999) argued that organizations
need to change in order to address issues surrounding
women and management and to utilize the diversity of
Conceptual Shifts in Gender Stereotyping women’s skills and talents. Such arguments are an
extension of earlier approaches of Women in Management.
There are three clear conceptual shifts in management lit- The advocates of Women and Management argued for both
erature, which it is necessary to understand if we are to theoretical and practical approaches to consider women as
partners and shareholders in the process of management Ellemers (2018) emphasized the impact of categorization
and decision making. The approach moved beyond the and socialization based on past experience. Social
issue of the representation and participation of women in constructions such as social and cultural status quo (Cuddy
management: it emphasized equality and the distinctive et al., 2015), society’s expectation (MacNell, Driscoll, &
nature of women’s knowledge, work, goals, and Hunt, 2015), culture (Hinton, 2016), education (Islam &
responsibilities in management processes. However, this Asadullah, 2018) and family upbringing (Endendijk et al.,
approach also failed to adequately address the issue of 2014) influence gender stereotypes, which create barriers
gender stereotyping. Like the Women in Management for women in management. The representation of women
approach, the Women and Management approach worked in management and leadership has increased over the years
within a patriarchal managerial perspective which viewed but gender stereotypes did not decline. The theoretical
women as a productive force. In this respect, it conformed shifts in management literature did not entail transitions in
to the domain perspective of economic empiricism within the practice of gender stereotypes in society. Gender
managerial science. UNHR (2014), by contrast, asserted stereotyping continues to exist in the workplace that halts
that gender stereotyping is an obstacle to human rights and women’s career progression.
is a violation of women’s rights.
The Women and Management approach helped in
improving participation of women in the workplace but Conclusion
women were deprived of equal opportunities. Women were
negatively evaluated due to generalization of information This paper provides an in-depth conceptual analysis of the
(Canal, Garnham, & Oakhill, 2015), threat to self-esteem antecedents and consequences of gender stereotyping and its
(Inesi & Cable, 2015) and in-group favouritism (Gordon, theoretical transition. Further empirical research in a range
2005). The status of women in the workplace (Gilbert, of different cultural and organizational contexts would
Burnett, Phau, & Haar 2010) was inferior as compared to increase our understanding. The paper noted conceptual
men and faced gender-specific behaviour in the workplace shifts in the literature and the understanding of aspects of
(Ball & Brewis, 2008). This resulted in women experiencing gender stereotypes. The progressive theoretical shift in
tokenism (Bilimoria, Godwin, & Zelechowski, 2007) in the management literature did not change managerial practices
workplace. Women were considered emotionally unstable, based on gender stereotypes. The critical review of existing
weak and timid (Heilman, 2001), risk-averse (Maxfield, literature reflects that individual factors, family factors,
Shapiro, Gupta, & Hass, 2010), intuitive decision maker socio-cultural factors and organizational factors shape
(Gilbert, Burnett, Phau, & Haar 2010) therefore, was not stereotyped thinking in human beings thereby perpetuating
considered for progression to managerial positions. gender discrimination and obstructing the career progressions
The third conceptual shift took place with the growth of of women in organizations. Therefore, theories of
a rights-based approach to management which regarded management need to engage with critical social theories of
women and men as having equal rights in different aspects gender to understand the patriarchal social, economic,
and different levels of managerial processes. The Gender cultural, political and religious conditions in which gender
and Management approach focused on gender-based social stereotypes are rooted.
constructions and stereotypes which disempower women
in management. It highlighted the gender-based value Declaration of Conflicting Interests
system that creates the foundation for stereotypes and The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
gender inequalities. Authors like Berkery, Morley and to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Tiernan (2013) and Ellemers (2018) argued for developing
Funding
a more inclusive and gender-sensitive managerial culture
free from gender stereotypes emanating from existing The authors received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
unequal gender relations in the society. Brescoll (2016) and
Bosak, Eagly, Diekman and Sczesny (2017) argued that ORCID iDs
management needs to create conditions of gender equality
Naznin Tabassum https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2669-9804
in workplaces and to address gender stereotypes in
Bhabani Shankar Nayak https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4927-0055
managerial praxis. All these three theoretical transitions
and conceptual shifts shaped women’s empowerment in Notes
management processes, but still, stereotypes continue to
1. See Lau and Kuziemsky (2017) for selection and synthesising
hurt women’s career progressions. literature for review and evaluation.
The Gender and Management approach focused on 2. See Pare et al. (2015) for details on typology of literature
social constructions, which influence gender stereotyping. review.
References Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an angry women

get ahead? Association for Psychological Science, 19(3),
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford,
268–275.
R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. New York:
Brescoll, V. L. (2016). Leading with their hearts? How gender
Harper and Row.
stereotypes of emotion lead to biased evaluations of female
Agars, M. D. (2004). Reconsidering the impact of gender
leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 415–428.
stereotypes on the advancement of women in organizations.
Bruner, J. S. (1957). On perceptual readiness. Psychological
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 103–111.
Review, 64, 123–152.
Akanbi, T. A., & Salami, A. O. (2011). Women in managerial
Budgeon, S. (2012). Third wave feminism and the politics of
positions (problems and prospects). Journal of Business and
gender in late modernity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Organizational Development, 3, 47–59.
Cabrera, S. F., Sauer, S. J., & Thomas-Hunt, M. C. (2009). The
Al-Manasra, E. A. (2013). What are the glass ceiling barriers
evolving manager stereotype: The effects of industry gender
effects on women career progress in Jordan? International typing on performance expectations for leaders and their
Journal of Business and Management, 8(6), 40–46. teams. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33(4), 419–428.
Amodio, D. (2014). The neuroscience of prejudice and Cacioppo, J. T., Marshall-Goodell, B. S., Tassinary, L. G., & Petty,
stereotyping. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15, 670–682. R. E. (1992). Rudimentary determinants of attitudes: Classical
Ball, A., & Brewis, J. (2008). Gender counts: Work, life and conditioning is more effective when prior knowledge about
identity in accounting practice and education. Pacific the attitude stimulus is low than high. Journal of Experimental
Accounting Review, 20(2), 85–93. Social Psychology, 28, 207–233.
Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2015). Detecting and experiencing Canal, P., Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (2015). Beyond gender
prejudice: New answers to old questions. Advances in stereotypes in language comprehension: Self sex-role
Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 139–219. descriptions affect the brain’s potentials associated with
Bartsch, R. A., & Judd C. M. (1993). Majority-minority status and agreement processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1953,
perceived in-group variability revisited. European Journal of 1–17.
Social Psychology, 23, 471–483. Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1997). Non-conscious behavioural
Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualised society. Cambridge, UK: confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of
Polity Press. automatic stereotype activation. Journal of Experimental
Bell, M. P. (2007). Diversity in organisations. Mason, OH: Social Psychology, 33(5), 541–560.
Thompson South-Western. Crampton, S. M., & Mishra, J. M. (1999). Women in
Bell-Dolan, D. & Anderson, C. A. (1999). Attributional processes: management. Public Personnel Management, 28(1), 87–106.
An integration of social and clinical psychology. In R. M. Collinson, D.L., & Hearn, J. (1995). Men as managers, managers
Kowalski & M. R. Leary (eds.), The social psychology of as men; Critical perspectives on men, masculinities and
emotional and behavioural problems: Interfaces of social and managements. London: SAGE.
clinical psychology (pp. 37–67). Washington, DC: American Cooper, C. (1985). Positive action for female executives. Women
Psychological Association. in Management Review, 1(1), 15–18.
Berkery, E., Morley, M., & Tiernan, S. (2013). Beyond gender Cuadrado, I., García-Ael, C., & Molero, F. (2015). Gender-
role stereotypes and requisite managerial characteristics. typing of leadership: Evaluations of real and ideal
Gender in Management: An International Journal, 28(5), managers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(2),
278–298. 236–244.
Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2006). A developmental intergroup Cuddy, A. J., Wolf, E. B., Glick, P., Crotty, S., Chong, J., &
theory of social stereotypes and prejudice. In R. V. Kail (ed.), Norton, M. I. (2015). Men as cultural ideals: Cultural values
Advances in child development and behaviour (pp. 39–89). moderate gender stereotype content. Journal of Personality
San Diego, CA: Elsevier. and Social Psychology, 109, 622–635.
Bilimoria, D., Godwin, L., & Zelechowski, D. D. (2007). Dambrin, C., & Lambert, C. (2012). Who is she and who are we?
Influence and Inclusion: A framework for researching A reflexive journey in research into the rarity of women in
women’s advancement in organisations. In D. Bilimoria & the highest ranks of accountancy. Critical Perspectives on
S. K. Piderit (eds.), Handbook on women in business and Accounting, 23, 1–16.
management (pp. 232–253). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Davison, H. K., & Burke, M. J. (2000). Sex discrimina-
Publishing Inc. tion in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic
Bombuwela, P. M., & De Alwis, A. C. (2013). Effects of glass investigation. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 56(2),
ceiling on women career development in private sector 225–248.
organizations: Case of Sri Lanka. Journal of Competitiveness, Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S., & Baumgarten, P. (2007).
5(2), 3–19. Women matter: Gender diversity, a corporate performance
Bosak, J., Eagly, A., Diekman, A., & Sczesny, S. (2017). Women driver. Paris: McKinsey & Company.
and men of the past, present, and future: Evidence of dynamic Dickerson, A., & Taylor, M. A. (2000). Self-limiting behaviour in
gender stereotypes in Ghana. Journal of Cross-Cultural women self-esteem and self-efficacy as predictors. Group &
Psychology, 49, 115–129. Organization Management, 25(2), 191–210.
Brenner, O. C., Tomkiewicz, J. & Schein, V. E. (1989). The Diehl, M., & Jonas, K. (1991). Measure of national stereotypes
relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite as predictors of latencies of inductive versus deductive
management characteristics revisited. Academy of stereotypic judgements. European Journal of Social
Management Journal, 32(3), 662–669. Psychology, 21, 317–330.
Diekman, A. B., & Goodfriend, W. (2006). Rolling with Ghorbani, M., & Tung, R. L. (2007). Behind the veil: An
the changes: A role congruity perspective on gender exploratory study of myths and realities of women in Iranian
norms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 369–383. workforce. Human Resource Management Journal, 17(4),
Eagly, A. H. ,& Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of 376–392.
leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9)63–71. Gilbert, R. G., Burnett, M. F., Phau, I., & Haar, J. (2010).
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of Does gender matter? A review of work-related gender
prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, commonalities. Gender in Management: An International
573–598. Journal, 25(8), 676–699.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behaviour: A social- Goff, P. A., Steele, C. M., & Davies, P. G. (2008). The space
role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. between us: Stereotype threat and distance in interracial
Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
women and men. American Psychologist, 50, 145–158. 94(1), 91–107.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2013). The nature-nurture debates: Gorman, E. H. (2005). Gender stereotypes, same-gender
25 years of challenges in understanding the psychology of preferences, and organizational variation in the hiring of
gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340–357. women: Evidence from law firms. American Sociological
Eagly, A. H. (1997). Sex differences in social behavior: Comparing Review, 70(4), 702–728.
social role theory and evolutionary psychology. The American Grant Thornton IBR (2017). Women in business: New perspectives
Psychologist, 52(12), 1380–1383. on risk and reward. London: Grant Thornton International
Elacqua, T. C., Beehr, T. A., Hansen, C. P., & Webster, J. (2009). Limited.
Managers’ beliefs about the glass ceiling: Interpersonal and Green, E., & Casell, C. (1996). Women managers gendered
organisational factors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, cultural processes and organisational change. Gender, Work
33(3), 285–295. and Organisation, 3(3), 168–178.
Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Grobler, P., Warnich, S., Carell, M. R., Elbert, N. F., & Hatfield,
R. D. (2006). Human resource management in South Africa.
Psychology, 69, 275–298.
London: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Elsaid, A. M., & Elsaid, E. (2012). Sex stereotyping managerial
Grunspan, D. Z., Eddy, S. L., Brownell, S. E., Wiggins, B. L.,
positions: A cross-cultural comparison between Egypt
Crowe, A. J., & Goodreau, S. M. (2016). Males under-estimate
and the USA. Gender in Management: An International
academic performance of their female peers in undergraduate
Journal, 27(2), 81–99.
biology classrooms. PLoS ONE, 11(2), 1–16.
Endendijk, et al. (2014). Boys don’t play with dolls: Mothers’ and
Gupta, V. K., Turban, D., Arzu Wasti, S., & Sikdar, A. (2009).
fathers’ gender talk during picture book reading. Parenting:
The role of gender stereotypes in perceptions of entrepreneurs
Science and Practice, 14(3–4), 141–161.
and intentions to become an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship:
Fagot, B. I., Leinbach, M. D., & O’Boyle, C. (1992).
Theory and Practice, 33(2), 397–417.
Gender labelling, gender stereotyping and parenting Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender
behaviours. Developmental Psychology, 28(2), 225–230. stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657–674.
social research. London: Routledge. Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., Martell, R. F., & Simon, M. C.
Fischbach, A., Lichtenthaler, P. W., & Horstmann, N. (2015). (1989). Has anything changed? Current characteristics of
Leadership and gender stereotyping of emotions: Think men, women and managers. Journal of Applied Psychology,
manager–think male? Journal of Personnel Psychology, 14, 74(6), 935–942.
153–162. Hill, T., Lewicki, P., Czyzewska, M., & Boss, A. (1989). Self-
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition: From brains perpetuating development of encoding biases in person
to culture (2nd ed.). London: SAGE. perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Fiske, S.T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power 57, 373–387.
on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628. Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual
Fullagar, C. J., Sverke, M., Sumer, C. H., & Slick, R. (2003). Review of Psychology, 47(1), 237–271.
Managerial sex-role stereotyping: A cross cultural analysis. Hinton, P. R. (2000). Stereotypes, cognition and culture. East
International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 3(1), Sussex: Psychology Press.
93–107. Hinton, P. R. (2016). The perception of people: Integrating
Garcia-Retamero, R., Muller, S. M., & Lopez-Zafra, E. (2011). cognition and culture. London: Routledge.
The malleability of gender stereotypes: Influence of Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications:
population size on perceptions of men and women in the A social psychology of intergroup relations and group
past, present, and future. Journal of Social Psychology, 151, processes. London: Routledge.
635–656. Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership.
Gardiner, M., & Tiggemann, M. (1999). Gender differences in Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184–200.
leadership style, job stress and mental health in male and Hornsey, M. J. (2008). Social identity theory and self-
female dominated industries. Journal of Occupational and categorization theory: A historical review. Social and
Organizational Psychology, 72(3), 301–315. Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 204–222.
Gatrell, C., & Cooper, L. (2007). No cracks in the glass ceiling: IBR. (2020). Women in business 2020: Putting the blueprint into
Women managers, stress and the barriers to success. In D. action. Grant Thornton Report (pp. 1–7). Retrieved from
Bilimoria & S. K. Piderit (eds.), Handbook on women in https://www.grantthornton.global/globalassets/1.-member-
business and management (pp. 57–75). Cheltenham: Edward firms/global/insights/women-in-business/2020/women-in-
Elgar Publishing Inc. business-2020_report.pdf
Inesi, M. E., & Cable, D. M. (2015). When accomplishments Li Kusterer, H., Lindholm, T., & Montgomery, H. (2013). Gender
come back to haunt you: The negative effect of competence typing in stereotypes and evaluations of actual managers.
signals on women’s performance evaluations. Personnel Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(5), 561–579.
Psychology, 68(3), 615–657. Lippmann, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York: Harcourt-
Islam, K., & Asadullah, M. N. (2018). Gender stereotypes and Brace.
education: A comparative content analysis of Malaysian, Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental:
Indonesian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi school textbooks. PLoS Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level
ONE, 13(1), 1–24. female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology,
Jackson, D., Engstrom, E., & Emmers-Sommer, T. (2007). Think 91(4), 777–785.
leader, think male and female: Sex vs seating arrangements as Macrae, C. N., Hewstone, M., & Griffiths, R. J. (1993). Processing
leadership cues. Sex Roles, 57(9–10), 713–723. load and memory for stereotype-based information. European
Jain, N., & Mukherjee, S. (2010). The perception of glass ceiling Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 77–87.
in Indian organisations: An exploratory study. South Asian Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B, & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994).
Journal of Management, 17(1), 23–42. Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the
Jamali, D., Sidani, Y., & Safieddine, A. (2005). Constraints facing cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social
working women in Lebanon: An insider view. Women in Psychology, 66, 37–47.
Management Review, 20(8), 581–594. MacNell, L., Driscoll, A., & Hunt, A. N. (2015). What’s in a
Johnson, R., & Redmond, D. (2000). Diversity incorporated: name: Exposing gender bias in student ratings of teaching.
Managing people for success in a diverse world. London: Innovative Higher Education, 40, 291–303.
Pearson Education Limited. Marshall, J. (1985). A testing time, full of potential. Women in
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in Management Review, 1(1), 5–14.
system-justification and the production of false consciousness. Manwa, H. A. (2002). Think manager, think male: Does it apply
British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27. to Zimbabwe? Zambezia, 29(1), 60–75.
Kanazawa, S. (1992). Outcome or expectancy? Antecedent Maxfield, S., Shapiro, M., Gupta, V., & Hass, S. (2010). Gender
of spontaneous causal attribution. Personality and Social and risk: Women, risk taking and risk aversion. Gender in
Psychology Bulletin, 18, 659–668. Management: An International Journal, 25(7), 586–604.
Kang, L. S. (2012). Women on corporate boards: A literature McKenzie-Mohr, D., & Zanna, M. P. (1990). Treating women
review. Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, 5(1), as sexual objects: Look to the gender schematic male who
32–49. has viewed pornography. Journal of Personality and Social
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New Psychology Bulletin, 16, 296–308.
York: Basic Books. McRobbie, A. (2009). The aftermath of feminism. London, UK:
Khayria, K., & Feki, R. (2015). Gender inequality and economic SAGE.
development. Business and Economics Journal, 6(4), 1–3. Mirza, A. M. B., & Jabeen, N. (2011). Gender stereotypes and
Koch, A. J., D’Mello, S. D., & Sackett, P. R. (2015). A meta- women in management: The case of banking sector of
analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental Pakistan. A Research Journal of South Asian Studies, 26(2),
simulations of employment decision making. Journal of 259–284.
Applied Psychology, 100(1), 128–161. Mulvey, K. L., Rizzo, M. T., & Killen, M. (2015). Challenging
Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. gender stereotypes: Theory of mind and peer group
(2011). Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis dynamics. Developmental Science, 19(6), 999–1010.
of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), Napasri, T., & Yukondi, V. (2015) A study of Thai female
616–642. executives: Perceived barriers to career advancement. Review
Koenig, A. M., & Eagly, A. H. (2005). Stereotype threat in men of Integrative Business and Economics Research, 4(3),
on a test of social sensitivity. Sex Roles, 52, 489–496. 108–120.
Koenig, A. M., & Eagly, A. H. (2014). Extending role congruity Operario, D., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Causes and consequences
theory of prejudice to men and women with sex-typed mental of stereotypes in organisations. In M. London, How people
illnesses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(1), 70–82. evaluate others in organisations (pp. 45–62). Mahwah, NJ:
Latu, I. M., Schmid Mast, M., & Stewart, T. L. (2015). Gender Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
biases in (inter) action: The role of interviewers’ and Orser, B. (1994). Sex role stereotypes and requisite management
applicants’ implicit and explicit stereotypes in predicting characteristics: An international perspective. Women in
women’s job interview outcomes. Psychology of Women Management Review, 9(4), 11–19.
Quarterly, 39(4), 539–552. Owuamalam, C. K., & Zagefka, H. (2014). On the psychological
Lau F., & Kuziemsky, C. (2017). Handbook of eHealth evaluation: barriers to the workplace: When and why meta-stereotyping
An evidence-based approach. University of Victoria, Victoria undermines employability beliefs of women and ethnic
(BC). minorities. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority
Lewis, P. (2012). Post-feminism and entrepreneurship: Psychology, 20(4), 521–528.
Interpreting disgust in a female entrepreneurial narrative. In Paré G., Trudel M. C., Jaana M., & Kitsiou S. (2015). Synthesizing
R. Simpson, N. Slutskaya, P. Lewis, & H. Hopfl (eds.), Dirty information systems knowledge: A typology of literature
work: Concepts and identities (pp. 223–238). Basingstoke, reviews. Information & Management, 52(2), 183–199.
UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Pillai, K. R., Prasad, S., & Thomas, J. (2011). Why do women still
Lewis, P. (2014). Post feminism, femininities and organization experience downward gravitation in the corporate ladder? A
studies: Exploring a new agenda. Organization Studies, close look at glass ceiling at Bahrain. Research & Practice in
35(12), 1845–1866. Human Resource Management, 19(1), 1–10.
Powell, G. N. (2011). The gender and leadership Skelly, J., & Johnson, J. B. (2011). Glass ceilings and great
wars. Organizational Dynamics, 40(1), 1–9. expectations: Gender stereotype impact on female
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2007). Organisational behaviour. professionals. Southern Law Journal, 21, 59–70.
New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. Skowronski, J. J., Carlston, D. E., & Isham, J. T. (1993). Implicit
Robinson, R. J., Keltner, D., Ward. A., & Ross, L. (1995). versus explicit impression formation: The differing effects
Actual versus assumed differences in construal: Realism in of overt labelling and covert priming on memory and
intergroup perception and conflict. Journal of Personality impressions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29,
and Social Psychology, 68, 404–417. 17–41.
Ruble D. N., Martin, C. L., & Berenbaum, S. (2006). Gender Smith, E. R., Stewart, T. L., & Buttram, R. T. (1992). Inferring a
development. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (eds.), Handbook trait from a behaviour has long term, highly specific effects.
of child psychology: Personality and social development, 6(3) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 753–759.
(pp. 858–932). New York: Wiley Publishers. Sogra, K. J. (1995). Women in management: Champions of
Rudman, L. A., & Borgida, E. (1995). The afterglow of construct change. Bangladesh: University Press Ltd.
accessibility: The behavioural consequences of priming men Sogra, K. J. (2014). The impact of gender differences on the
to view women as sexual objects. Journal of Experimental conflict management styles of managers in Bangladesh: An
Social Psychology, 31(6), 493–517. Analysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
Ryan, M. K., Alexander Haslam, S., & Postmes, T. (2007). Spencer, S. J., & Fein, S. (1994). The effect of self-image threats
Reactions to the glass cliff: Gender differences in the on stereotyping. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
explanations for the precariousness of women’s leadership East Psychological Association, 65th Providence, RI.
positions. Journal of Organizational Change Management, Stangor, C., & Duan, C. (1991). Effects of multiple task demands
20(2), 82–197. upon memory for information about social groups. Journal of
Sauers, D. A., Kennedy, J. C., & O’Sullivan, D. (2002). Managerial Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 357–378.
sex role stereotyping: A New Zealand perspective. Women in Stapel, D. A., & Noordewier, M. K. (2011). The mental roots of
Management Review, 17(7), 342–347. system justification: System threat, need for structure and
Sayman, D. M. (2007). The elimination of sexism and stereotyping stereotyping. Social Cognition, 29(3), 238–254.
in occupational education. The Journal of Men’s Studies, Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending
15(1), 19–30. with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 34, 379–440.
Schein, V. E., & Muller, R. (1992). Sex role stereotyping and Stoker, J. I., Van der Velde, M., & Lemmers, J. (2012). Factors
requisite management characteristics: A cross cultural look. relating to managerial stereotypes: The role of gender of the
Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 13(5), 439–447. employee and the manager and management gender ratio.
Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes Journal of Business Psychology, 27(1), 31–42.
and requisite management characteristics. Journal of Applied Tabassum, N., Shafique, S., Konstantopoulou, A., & Arslan,
Psychology, 57(2), 95–100. A. (2019). Antecedents of women managers’ resilience:
Schein, V. E. (1975). The relationship between sex role stereotypes Conceptual discussion and implications for HRM.
and requisite management characteristics among female International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(2),
managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3), 340–344. 241–268.
Schein, V. E., Mueller, R., Lituchy, T., & Liu, J. (1996). Think Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory
manager-think male: A global phenomenon? Journal of of intergroup behaviour. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin
Organisational Behaviour, 17(1), 33–41. (eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24).
Schein, V. E., Muller, R., & Jacobson, C. (1989). The relationship Chicago: Nelson.
between sex role stereotype and requisite management Trusty, J. (2002). Effects of high school course-taking and other
characteristics among college students. Sex Roles, 20(1–2), variables on choice of science and mathematics college
103–110. majors. Journal of Counselling and Development, 80(4),
Schein, V.E. (2007). Women in management: Reflections and 464–474.
projections. Women in Management Review, 22(1), 6–18. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., &
Schmitt, M. T., & Wirth, J. H. (2009). Evidence that gender Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A
differences in social dominance orientation result from self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
gendered self-stereotyping and group-interested responses to UNHR. (2014). Gender stereotypes and stereotyping and women’s
patriarchy. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 429–436. rights. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
Sedikides, C., & Skowronski, J. J. (1991). The law of cognitive Palais des Nations, CH–1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland.
structure activation. Psychological Inquiry, 2, 169–184. Vogel, D. L., Wester, S. R., Heesacker, M., & Madon S. (2003).
Sherman, S. J., Mackie, D. M., & Driscoll, D. M. (1990) Priming Confirming gender stereotypes: A social role perspectives.
and the differential use of dimensions in evaluation. Journal Sex Roles, 48, 11–12.
of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 405–418. Von Hippel, W., Sekaquaptewa, D., & Vargas, P. (1995). On the
Singh, R., & Sebastian, T. (2018). Familial legacies: A study on role of encoding processes in stereotype maintenance. In M.
Gujarati women and family entrepreneurship. Journal of P. Zanna (ed), Advances in experimental social psychology,
Global Entrepreneurship Research, 8(5), 1–23. Vol. 27 (pp. 177–254). Orlando, FL: Academic.
Williams M. J., & Tiedens L. Z. (2016). The subtle suspension of Yang, Y. (2011). Gender and engineering career development of
backlash: A meta-analysis of penalties for women’s implicit hotel’s employees in China. Systems Engineering Procedia,
and explicit dominance behaviour. Psychological Bulletin, 1(1), 365–371.
142, 165–197. Zafarullah, H. (2000). Through the brick wall and the glass
Wolfe, C. T., Spencer, S. J., & Fein, S. (1995). Influence of moti- ceiling: Women in the civil service in Bangladesh. Gender,
vation on implicit stereotyping. Paper Presented at the Annual Work and Organization, 7(3), 197–209.
Convention of American Psychological Association, New York. Zahidi, S., & Ibarra, H. (2010). The corporate gender gap
World Economic Forum. (2017). Global gender gap report 2017. report. Retrieved, 11 March 2019, from World Economic
Retrieved, 10 March 2019, from: http://www3.weforum.org/ Forum: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GenderGap_
docs/WEF_GGGR_2017.pdf CorporateReport_2010.pdf

Gender stereotypes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gender stereotypes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gender stereotypes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article

Naznin Tabassum1 and Bhabani Shankar Nayak2

Antecedents Authors Theories

differences Self-categorization theories (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher &

Socialisation based Bruner (1957); McKenzie-Mohr Theory of Priming

Antecedents Authors Theories

Status Quo et al. (2015).

Latu, Mast & Stewart (2015).

Theorizing Gender Stereotyping in Theory of Social Role, Gender

Society’s expectation. Society’s expectation regarding Organizational Factors

References Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an angry women

You might also like