Heavier Lies Her Crown: Gendered Patterns of Leader Emotional Labor and Their Downstream Effects.

Women use power in more prosocial ways than men and they also engage in more emotional labor (i.e., self-regulate their emotions to respond and attend to the needs and emotions of other people in a way that advances organizational goals). However, these two constructs have not been previously connected. We propose that gendered emotional labor practices and pressures result in gender differences in the prosocial use of power. We integrate the literature on emotional labor with research on the psychology of power to articulate three routes through which this happens. First, women may be more adept than men at the intrapersonal and interpersonal processes entailed in emotional labor practices-a skill that they can apply at all hierarchical levels. Second, given women's stronger internal motivation to perform emotional labor, they construe power in a more interdependent manner than men, which promotes a more prosocial use of power. As a result, female powerholders tend to behave in more prosocial ways. Third, when they have power, women encounter stronger external motivation to engage in emotional labor, which effectively constrains powerful women's behaviors in a way that fosters a more prosocial use of power. We discuss how, by promoting prosocial behavior among powerholders, emotional labor can be beneficial for subordinates and organizations (e.g., increase employee well-being and organizational trust), while simultaneously creating costs for individual powerholders, which may reduce women's likelihood of actually attaining and retaining power by (a) making high-power roles less appealing, (b) guiding women toward less prestigious and (c) more precarious leadership roles, (d) draining powerful women's time and resources without equitable rewards, and (e) making it difficult for women to legitimize their power in the eyes of subordinates (especially men). Thus, emotional labor practices can help explain the underrepresentation of women in top leadership positions.

An Emphasis on Brilliance Fosters Masculinity-Contest Cultures.

Women are underrepresented in fields in which success is believed to require brilliance, but the reasons for this pattern are poorly understood. We investigated perceptions of a "masculinity-contest culture," an organizational environment of ruthless competition, as a key mechanism whereby a perceived emphasis on brilliance discourages female participation. Across three preregistered correlational and experimental studies involving adult lay participants online (N = 870) and academics from more than 30 disciplines (N = 1,347), we found a positive association between the perception that a field or an organization values brilliance and the perception that this field or organization is characterized by a masculinity-contest culture. This association was particularly strong among women. In turn, perceiving a masculinity-contest culture predicted lower interest and sense of belonging as well as stronger impostor feelings. Experimentally reducing the perception of a masculinity-contest culture eliminated gender gaps in interest and belonging in a brilliance-oriented organization, suggesting possible avenues for intervention.

Individual variation in role construal predicts responses to third-party biases in hiring contexts.

We theorize that individuals' pre-existing beliefs about the hiring manager role (role construal) are associated with their tendency to condone bias accommodation in hiring contexts, in which a person aligns hiring decisions with the perceived biases of others. In two studies, we focus on human resources (HR) professionals' endorsement of the role demand to prioritize candidate fit with others (e.g., supervisor) when making hiring decisions. Study 1 examined bias accommodation from a vicarious perspective, revealing that role demand endorsement is positively associated with viewing it as acceptable and common for another hiring manager to accommodate third-party bias against women. Study 2 examined bias accommodation experimentally from an actor's perspective, showing lower preference for and selection of a female (vs. male) job candidate in the presence of cues to third-party bias against women, but only when role demand endorsement is relatively high. HR professionals in both studies indicated that third-party bias influences in hiring are relatively common. Responses in Study 2 provide preliminary evidence that the phenomenon of third-party bias accommodation might be relevant in the context of employment discrimination based on group characteristics other than gender (e.g., race/ethnicity, age). We discuss the practical implications of our findings for hiring professionals and for organizations seeking to increase diversity in their workforce.

Third-party prejudice accommodation increases gender discrimination.

We investigated how gatekeepers sometimes arrive at discriminatory hiring selections to accommodate prejudiced third parties due to role demands (i.e., the "third-party prejudice effect"). Studies 1 and 2 show that individuals in charge of personnel decisions were significantly less likely to select a woman when a relevant third party (the chief executive officer of the company in Study 1; the "proposer" in an ultimatum game in Study 2) was prejudiced against women. Gatekeepers accommodate third-party prejudice in this way in order to avoid conflict in relations and task-related problems that would likely occur if the gatekeeper introduced a member of the target of prejudice into an organization. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that both interpersonal and task-focused concerns significantly mediated third-party prejudice accommodation. Furthermore, experimentally reducing task-focused concerns significantly reduced the accommodation of third-party prejudice against women (Study 4). We also found that gatekeepers accommodate third-party prejudice regardless of their own beliefs and attitudes (Studies 5 and 6), or their own desire to get along or affiliate with the third party (Study 7), and despite leading to feelings of guilt (Studies 4 and 5). Both men and women accommodated third-party prejudice against women. A role-based framework can be useful to understand the persistence of gender inequality in various fields and organizations, even as individuals endorse increasingly gender-egalitarian views. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Unnecessary Frills: Communality as a Nice (But Expendable) Trait in Leaders.

Although leader role expectations appear to have become relatively more compatible with stereotypically feminine attributes like empathy, women continue to be highly underrepresented in leadership roles. We posit that one reason for this disparity is that, whereas stereotypically feminine traits are appreciated as nice "add-ons" for leaders, it is stereotypically masculine attributes that are valued as the defining qualities of the leader role, especially by men (who are often the gatekeepers to these roles). We assessed men's and women's idea of a great leader with a focus on gendered attributes in two studies using different methodologies. In Study 1, we employed a novel paradigm in which participants were asked to design their "ideal leader" to examine the potential trade-off between leadership characteristics that were more stereotypically masculine (i.e., agency) and feminine (i.e., communality). Results showed that communality was valued in leaders only after meeting the more stereotypically masculine requirements of the role (i.e., competence and assertiveness), and that men in particular preferred leaders who were more competent (vs. communal), whereas women desired leaders who kept negative stereotypically masculine traits in check (e.g., arrogance). In Study 2, we conducted an experiment to examine men's and women's beliefs about the traits that would be important to help them personally succeed in a randomly assigned leader (vs. assistant) role, allowing us to draw a causal link between roles and trait importance. We found that both men and women viewed agentic traits as more important than communal traits to be a successful leader. Together, both studies make a valuable contribution to the social psychological literature on gender stereotyping and bias against female leaders and may illuminate the continued scarcity of women at the very top of organizations, broadly construed.

Differential support for female supervisors among men and women.

Two studies evaluated the lay belief that women feel particularly negatively about other women in the workplace and particularly in supervisory roles. The authors tested the general proposition, derived from social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 2004), that women, compared to men, may be more supportive of other women in positions of authority, whereas men would respond more favorably to other men than to women in positions of authority. Consistent with predictions, data from an online experiment (n = 259), in which the authors randomly assigned men and women to evaluate identical female (vs. male) supervisors in a masculine industry, and a correlational study in the workplace using a Knowledge Networks sample (n = 198) converged to demonstrate a pattern of gender in-group favoritism. Specifically, in Study 1, female participants (vs. male participants) rated the female supervisor as higher status, were more likely to believe that a female supervisor had attained her supervisory position because of high competence, and viewed the female supervisor as warmer. Study 2 results replicated this pattern. Female employees (vs. male employees) rated their female supervisors as higher status and practiced both in-role and extra-role behaviors more often when their supervisor was female. In both studies, male respondents had a tendency to rate male supervisors more favorably than female supervisors, whereas female respondents tended to rate female supervisors more favorably than male supervisors. Thus, across both studies, the authors found a pattern consistent with gender in-group favoritism and inconsistent with lay beliefs that women respond negatively to women in authority positions. (PsycINFO Database Record

Relative Efficiency of Field and Online Strategies in the Recruitment of HIV-Positive Men Who Have Sex With Men.

Efforts to reach HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) and link them to care must be expanded; however, finding and recruiting them remains a challenge. We compared the efficiency of three recruitment sources in reaching self-identified HIV-positive MSM with various characteristics. Relative to recruitment online and at clubs and bars, AIDS Service Organizations (ASOs) were significantly more efficient in reaching HIV-positive MSM in general. This was also true for those with specific characteristics of interest such as substance/stimulant use, and HIV-positive MSM who were racial/ethnic minorities. Both ASOs and online recruitment were more efficient than clubs and bars in reaching HIV-positive MSM not taking HIV medication. This was also the case for White HIV-positive MSM in general, and White HIV-positive MSM who used substances and stimulants. Online recruitment was also more efficient than clubs and bars in reaching HIV-positive MSM who were young across the board.

Finding and recruiting the highest risk HIV-negative men who have sex with men.

This study compared the ability of different field and online recruitment venues to reach those at highest risk for HIV infection among HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM), given that some subgroups are difficult to reach, and venues vary in the demographic characteristics of the samples they yield. Compared to other venues, dating/hookup websites reached significantly higher-than-expected concentrations of White MSM aged 40 and above, including those who reported unprotected anal intercourse (UAI). Facebook was the most successful venue for the recruitment of MSM who used stimulants, including those who reported UAI. MSM who reported UAI were more likely to be recruited online. This study points to systematic variation in the samples obtained via different recruitment strategies, which should be taken into consideration when designing intervention/prevention programs targeting HIV-negative MSM.

Recruiting drug using men who have sex with men in behavioral intervention trials: a comparison of internet and field-based strategies.

Although online and field-based samples of men who have sex with men (MSM) have been compared on a variety of markers, differences in drug use have not been well examined. In addition, generalization from studies comparing recruitment methods is often limited by a focus on either HIV seropositive or seronegative MSM. We compared two New York City-based samples of MSM recruited simultaneously between July 2009 and January 2010-one sample recruited in the field (n = 2,402) and one sample recruited via the Internet (n = 694). All recruitment efforts targeted men without restriction on age or self-reported HIV status. Our results show marked differences in drug and alcohol use between online and field-based samples of MSM. Specifically, men surveyed online were significantly more likely to have tried a variety of drugs, including methamphetamine, cocaine, and ecstasy. Men recruited online were also more likely to report older age, HIV positive serostatus, and "never" using condoms. Internet-based recruitment was found to be more cost-effective in terms of recruitment yield than was field-based recruitment.