Download
1 / 19
190 likes | 459 Views
Gender Stereotypes: Time for Change?. An examination of the findings of Duehr & Bono, 2006. Presentation Outline. Introduction of the topic Synopsis of the current study’s focus Study methodology, statistical techniques and related factors Results Questions of further Interest Conclusion.
E N D
Gender Stereotypes: Time for Change? An examination of the findings of Duehr & Bono, 2006.
Presentation Outline • Introduction of the topic • Synopsis of the current study’s focus • Study methodology, statistical techniques and related factors • Results • Questions of further Interest • Conclusion
Personality Qualities • Agentic • Assertive, dominant, confident, ambitious, and independent. • Communal • Compassionate, kind, sentimental, helpful, and generous. • Task-Oriented • The level in which a person is interested in completing objectives and goals; amount of time focusing on task related activities and issues. • Behaviors: Structuring goals, evaluating work quality, establishing objectives. • Relationship-Oriented • How focused an individual is on issues effecting interpersonal factors; importance and time spent maintaining relations, cohesion, liking, etc. • Behaviors: Supportive personal relationships, developing employees, demonstrations of respect and warmth.
Leadership Stereotypes • Qualities attributed to successful managers (Historically) • Agentic: Assertive, dominant, confident, ambitious, independent. • Task-oriented • Communal/Relationship based techniques were generally considered weaker/inefficient leadership styles. • Changes over time • Vertical Dyad Linkage Theory • Development of Leader-Member Exchange Theory • Transformational Leadership • The linking of work goals to worker values through inspiration, motivation, and commitment to a compelling vision.
Gender Stereotypes • Men • Historically: Agentic & Task-Oriented • Women • Historically: Communal & Relationship-Oriented • Potential Changes • Social Role Theory • Fundamental shifts in the distribution of men and women between social roles • Diversity Training • Identification of stereotypes and the promotion of inclusion, rather than highlighting, potentially negative/inaccurate, differences.
Duehr, E.E. & Bono, J. E., 2006Research Questions • Q1&Q2: Have management and gender stereotypes held by males and females changed relative to 15 and 30 years ago? • Q3: If gender stereotypes have changed, what is driving that change? • Q4: Do the broad gender stereotypic and leadership-specific characteristics attributed by men, women, and managers differ by sample? • Q5: Do specific individual differences predict beliefs about men, women, and managers?
Methodology - Sample • Four distinct samples
Methodology - Conditions • Seven unique conditions • Successful middle managers • Women in general • Men in general • Women managers • Men managers • Successful women managers • Successful men managers • Each participant responded to only one of the seven conditions, which resulted in a total of 28 groups with N’s ranging between 31 and 77.
Methodology - Measures • Schein’s (1973) Descriptive Index [Revised] • Included the 92 original items assessing Agentic, Communal, and Task-Oriented qualities • Also included 26 additional items to better represent current styles of leadership • 13 taken from the MLQ to describe transformational leaders • 13 relationship oriented items • Pilot testing (n=30) with a student sample yielded a test-retest reliability of .90.
Methodology – Statistical Techniques • Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) • These were used in place of Pearson’s correlations because ICCs consider both the relative correspondence and the absolute agreement between ratings. • The ICCs report the similarity of participants’ ratings of successful middle managers to each of the six gendered conditions. (Tables 4 & 5) • ANOVAs • Were used to reveal the variation between the individual gender and leadership scales between the four current samples. (Table 6) • Correlations (using categorical variables) • Zero-order correlations were used to assess the impace of specific individual difference variables such as gender, age, education, previous managerial role, and previous female supervisor satisfaction. (Table 7)
Results – Table 7 “…some correlations are noteworthy, including the relationship between age and education and having a female supervisor (r = -.50 …and r = -.25…).”
Questions/Responses • Why was an ICC used as apposed to Pearson correlations for the analysis? • “[Intraclass correlations] were used in place of Pearson’s correlations because ICCs consider both the relative correspondence and the absolute agreement between ratings.” • Umm… what? • The Pearson Correlation: related variables are assumed to be indicative of two distinct constructs; mean and variance are accounted for separately. • ICC: relationship is seen as a single variable measured from two different perspectives (members) within a single group; mean and variance are pooled. • Take-away: The ICC specifically illustrates variance due to group membership.
Questions/Responses • How did Duehr & Bono compare the size of the correlations? Could they have used Fisher’s Z? • Pg. 828 indicates correlations with a difference greater than .29 are significant at p < .05. Because ICCs are essential reliability measures, confidence intervals may be calculated (which would require some form of a Z transformation) and values outside that range would be considered significantly different. • It’s possible they used Fisher’s Z, but I could not find any information on whether or not it is valid on ICCs in addition to Pearson’s r. • How do you feel the study represented the evolution of gender stereotypes in the work place without accounting for covert discrimination?
