Testing the Effectiveness of an Intervention to Improve Romanian Teachers' LGBT+-Related Attitudes, Cognitions, Behaviors, and Affect: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Repeated stigmatization due to group membership constitutes a recurrent stressor with negative impact on physical and mental health (minority stress model). Among European countries, Romania ranks low on LGBT+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. The "+" represents individuals whose identities do not fit typical binary notions of male and female [nonbinary]) inclusion, with 45% of Romanian LGBT+ respondents reporting discrimination in at least 1 area of life in the year preceding the survey. Importantly, while all LGBT+ people might experience minority stress, younger sexual minority individuals are more prone to the detrimental impacts of stigma on their mental and physical health. As such, interventions are necessary to improve the inclusion climate within schools, where young people spend most of their time. Until now, most interventions addressing this topic have been conducted on undergraduate students in Western countries, with no studies conducted in countries that have widespread anti-LGBT+ attitudes. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the research protocol for a randomized controlled trial investigating whether LGBT+ stigma and bias among Romanian school teachers can be reduced using an internet-based intervention focusing on education and contact as primary training elements. METHODS: A sample of 175 school teachers will be randomly assigned to either the control or experimental group. The experimental group participants will receive the intervention first and then complete the outcome measures, whereas the control group will complete the outcome measures first and then receive the intervention. The 1-hour multimedia intervention is developed for internet-based delivery under controlled conditions. It includes 2 interactive exercises, 2 recorded presentations, animations, and testimonies from LGBT+ individuals. Data for attitudinal, behavioral, cognitive, and affective measures will be collected during the same session (before or after the intervention, depending on the condition). We also plan to conduct a brief mixed methods follow-up study at 6 to 8 months post participation to investigate potential long-term effects of training. However, due to attrition and lack of experimental control (all participants will have completed the intervention, regardless of the condition), these data will be analyzed and reported separately using a mixed methods approach. RESULTS: This paper details the protocol for the teacher intervention study. Data collection began in December 2022 and was completed by February 2023. Data analysis will be performed upon protocol acceptance. Follow-up measures will be completed in 2024. Results are expected to be submitted for publication following analysis in the spring of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study will establish the effectiveness of an internet-based intervention intended to lessen anti-LGBT stigma and sentiment in a nation where these views have long been prevalent. If successful, the intervention could end up serving as a resource for Romanian teachers and guidance counselors in high schools. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 84290049; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN84290049. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54254.

Navigating the leaky pipeline: Do stereotypes about parents predict career outcomes in academia?

The motherhood penalty seemingly reflects a preference to hire female professionals who are not parents compared to mothers, however, little is known about whether this effect is attributable to parent stereotypes per se. Study 1 assessed the content of the parent-academia stereotypes of 180 individuals working in Education and revealed stronger stereotypical associations of fathers with academia than mothers. Study 2 investigated what parent-academia stereotypes predict in terms of endorsements for hiring men versus women in a mock hiring task set in an academic context. Academics (N = 112) evaluated mock job candidates for an Assistant Professor post while the gender, parental status and leave status of the candidates were manipulated. The findings showed that parents were significantly less likely to be endorsed to be hired than non-parents, regardless of gender. Parent-academia stereotypes led to biased hiring recommendations, such that a greater endorsement of parent-academia stereotypes predicted a reduced likelihood to endorse hiring parents compared to non-parents. Implications for reducing parent stereotypes in academic contexts are discussed.

Gender and the pandemic: Associations between caregiving, working from home, personal and career outcomes for women and men.

The coronavirus pandemic lockdowns have led to an increase of caregiving and household responsibilities for many employees while working from home. We aimed to investigate whether there was a gender imbalance in the division of household labour within families during the pandemic, and whether this imbalance was associated with gender differences in personal outcomes (work-family conflict, burnout) as well as career-related outcomes (career self-efficacy and aspirations). Participants were 240 heterosexual individuals with or without caregiving responsibilities who lived with a partner and worked from home during the pandemic. They completed self-report questionnaires and indicated the division of domestic tasks within their household, the extent to which they experienced burnout and work-family conflict, and their career aspirations and career self-efficacy. The findings showed a significant gender imbalance, such that female caregivers spent significantly less time on work compared to the other groups and significantly more time on caregiving compared to male caregivers during the lockdown. There was a significant direct effect of caregiving on career outcomes for women, such that the more caregiving women performed during the lockdown relative to other tasks, the more negative their self-reported career outcomes were. Among men, caregiving did not predict career outcomes. Overall, our study showed that the gender imbalance in distributions of caregiving duties during the pandemic is associated with negative personal and professional outcomes for women who are caregivers. Practical implications are discussed accounting for this gender imbalance in the context of the pandemic and its influence on wellbeing and career outcomes, particularly for heterosexual women. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02630-6.

Empowering Mimicry: Female Leader Role Models Empower Women in Leadership Tasks Through Body Posture Mimicry.

In two studies we investigated the behavioral process through which visible female leader role models empower women in leadership tasks. We proposed that women tend to mimic the powerful (open) body postures of successful female role models, thus leading to more empowered behavior and better performance on a challenging leadership task, a process we called empowering mimicry. In Study 1, we experimentally manipulated the body posture of the male and female role models and showed that 86 Swiss college women mimicked the body posture of the female (ingroup) but not the male (outgroup) role model, thus leading to more empowered behavior and better performance on a public speaking task. In Study 2, we investigated the boundary conditions of this process and showed that empowering mimicry does not extend to exposures to non-famous female models among 50 Swiss college women. These findings suggest that nonverbal mimicry is one important mechanism through which female leader role models inspire women performing a challenging leadership task. From a practice perspective, our research underscores the importance of female leaders' visibility because visibility can drive other women's advancement in leadership by affording women the opportunity to mimic and be empowered by successful female role models.

Yes we can!: prejudice reduction through seeing (inequality) and believing (in social change).

We investigated the effect of differential perceived efficacy to reduce racial inequality (in the context of increased awareness of illegitimate in-group advantages) on White Americans' intergroup attitudes and antidiscrimination behavior. White American university students read a passage describing the underrepresentation of African Americans in their university's faculty and then wrote letters to the university administration in support of appointing more African Americans to the faculty. We experimentally varied feedback concerning efficacy to change institutional racism. Before writing their letters, participants were told that there was a low, moderate, or high chance that their efforts would be effective. Later in the experiment, participants' perceived efficacy to influence their university system was measured. Intergroup attitudes improved and antidiscrimination actions increased among participants with higher perceived efficacy in comparison with participants with low perceived efficacy. Collective guilt partially mediated the effects of efficacy beliefs on antidiscrimination actions and fully mediated the effects of efficacy beliefs on intergroup attitudes.