"Where will I belong more?": The role of belonging comparisons between STEM fields in high school girls' STEM interest.

In trying to understand women's underrepresentation in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics), most existing research focuses on one STEM-field or collapses across all STEM-fields. However, these fields differ vastly in female representation: women tend to be most strongly underrepresented in technological and computer science university majors and to a lesser extent in mathematics and chemistry, while they are less underrepresented in biological sciences. To understand this variability, we examine how girls in the process of making higher education choices compare different STEM-fields to each other. We draw upon dimensional comparison theory, which argues that educational motivation involves intra-individual comparisons of achievement across school subjects. However, previous research has shown that a focus on achievement in STEM is not enough, anticipated belonging in a STEM-field plays a pivotal role in interest in pursuing that field. Consistent with this, we examined participants' comparisons of anticipated belonging across STEM-fields. A sample of 343 high school girls in STEM-focused university tracks completed a survey on their anticipated belonging and interest in pursuing different STEM majors. Latent Profile Analysis resulted in 3 profiles, showing different belonging comparison patterns across STEM-fields. Examining these comparisons-both within and across profiles-showed how girls felt pushed away from certain STEM-fields and pulled toward others. The findings suggest that for interest in pursuing specific STEM-fields it is not just about the level of anticipated belonging within that STEM-field, but just as much about the level of anticipated belonging in comparison to another STEM-field. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11218-021-09663-6.

Daily Coping With Social Identity Threat in Outgroup-Dominated Contexts: Self-Group Distancing Among Female Soldiers.

We examine the degree to which women in a male-dominated field cope with daily experiences of social identity threat by distancing themselves from other women. A daily experience-sampling study among female soldiers (N = 345 data points nested in 61 participants) showed women to self-group distance more on days in which they experienced more identity threat. This was mediated by daily concerns about belonging but not achievement in the military, supporting the explanation that women distance from other women as a way to fit in a masculine domain. However, on a daily basis, self-group distancing did not appear to protect women's outcomes as it was related to lower daily well-being and motivation. The findings indicate that targets are not passive recipients of identity threat but active agents coping daily with the challenges they face, but that regulation strategies may also incur costs. Implications for theories on coping with stigma and costs are discussed.

Coping With Stigma in the Workplace: Understanding the Role of Threat Regulation, Supportive Factors, and Potential Hidden Costs.

Despite changes in their representation and visibility, there are still serious concerns about the inclusion and day-to-day workplace challenges various groups face (e.g., women, ethnic and cultural minorities, LGBTQ+, people as they age, and those dealing with physical or mental disabilities). Men are also underrepresented in specific work fields, in particular those in Health care, Elementary Education, and the Domestic sphere (HEED). Previous literature has shown that group stereotypes play an important role in maintaining these inequalities. We outline how insights from research into stigma, social identity, and self-regulation together increase our understanding of how targets are affected by and regulate negative stereotypes in the workplace. This approach starts from the basis that members of negatively stereotyped groups are not just passive recipients of negative attitudes, stereotypes, and behaviors but are active individuals pursuing multiple goals, such as goals for belonging and achievement. We argue that it is only by understanding stigma from the target's perspective (e.g., how targets are affected and respond) that we can successfully address workplace inequality. Key in this understanding is that stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination have taken on much more subtle forms, with consequences for the way members of stigmatized groups cope. These insights lead us to propose an approach to understanding barriers to workplace equality that highlights four key aspects: (1) the different (often subtle) potential triggers of identity threat in the workplace for members of stigmatized groups; (2) the ways in which members of stigmatized groups cope with these threats; (3) the role of supportive factors that mitigate potential threats and affect self-regulation; and (4) potential hidden costs for the self or others of what appears at first to be effective self-regulation. The focus on threats, coping, support, and potential hidden costs helps us understand why current diversity efforts are not always successful in increasing and maintaining members of stigmatized groups in organizations and provides insight into how we can aid efforts to effectively lower barriers to workplace equality.

Women (Do Not) Belong Here: Gender-Work Identity Conflict among Female Police Officers.

The current paper examines antecedents and consequences of perceiving conflict between gender and work identities in male-dominated professions. In a study among 657 employees working in 85 teams in the police force, we investigated the effect of being different from team members in terms of gender on employees' perception that their team members see their gender identity as conflicting with their work identity. As expected in the police force as a male-dominated field, the results showed that gender-dissimilarity in the team was related to perceived gender-work identity conflict for women, and not for men. In turn, perceiving gender-work identity conflict was related to lower team identification for men and women. Although lowering team identification might enable employees to cope with conflicting social identities and hence protect the self, this may also have its costs, as lower team identification predicted higher turnover intentions, more burn-out symptoms, less extra role behavior, lower job satisfaction, lower work motivation, and lower perceived performance. Additionally, for women, experiencing support from their team members and team leader showed a trend to mitigate the relationship between gender-dissimilarity and perceived gender-work identity conflict, and a positive diversity climate was marginally related to less perceived gender-work identity conflict. The results show the importance of the team context in shaping a climate of (in)compatible identities for numerically underrepresented and historically undervalued social group members in order to hinder or protect their work outcomes.

Combining Gender, Work, and Family Identities: The Cross-Over and Spill-Over of Gender Norms into Young Adults' Work and Family Aspirations.

The current study investigates how descriptive and prescriptive gender norms that communicate work and family identities to be (in)compatible with gender identities limit or enhance young men and women's family and career aspirations. Results show that young adults (N = 445) perceived gender norms to assign greater compatibility between female and family identities and male and work identities than vice versa, and that young men and women mirror their aspirations to this traditional division of tasks. Spill-over effects of norms across life domains and cross-over effects of norms across gender-groups indicated that young women, more than young men, aimed to 'have it all': mirroring their career ambitions to a male career model, while keeping their family aspirations high. Moreover, young women opposed traditional role divisions in the family domain by decreasing their family aspirations in face of norms of lower family involvement or higher career involvement of men. Conversely, in line with traditional gender roles, young men showed lower family aspirations in the face of strong male career norms; and showed increases in their career aspirations when perceiving women to take up more family roles. Young men's family aspirations were, however, more influenced by new norms prescribing men to invest more in their family, suggesting opportunities for change. Together, these findings show that through social norms, young adults' gender identity affects aspirations for how to manage the co-presence of their work and family identities. Altering these norms may provide leverage for change to allow both men and women to combine their multiple identities in an enriching way.