Gender and Group Behavior

  • Linda L. Carli
Chapter

Abstract

In the United States, it appears that the glass ceiling has broken. Women’s incomes have risen; among full-time U.S. employees, women now earn 80% of what men earn, compared with only 62% in 1979 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008a). Women have also made dramatic gains in education and now earn more bachelor’s degrees than men do (U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, 2007). Women have greater access to leadership as well. For example, across all organizations in the United States, 26% of CEOs today are women (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2008b, Table 11).

Keywords

Income Marketing Hunt Stein Kelly 

References

  1. Alagna, S. W., & Reddy, D. M. (1985). Self and peer ratings and evaluations of group process in mixed-sex and male medical training groups. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alagna, S. W., Reddy, D. M., & Collins, D. L. (1982). Perceptions of functioning in mixed-sex and male medical training groups. Journal of Medical Education, 57, 801–803.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, T. D. (2006). Rewarding good citizens: The relationship between citizenship behavior, gender, and organizational rewards. Journal of Applied Psychology, 36, 120–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, K. J., & Leaper, C. (1998). Meta-analyses of gender effects on conversational interruption: Who, what, when, where, and how. Sex Roles, 39, 225–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aries, E. (1976). Interaction patterns and themes of male, female, and mixed groups. Small Group Behavior, 7, 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger, J., Fisek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interactions: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  7. Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M.,Jr. (1980). Status organizing processes. American Sociological Review, 6, 479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berger, J., & Webster, M.,Jr. (2006). Expectations, status, and behavior. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories(pp. 268–300). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Berdahl, J. L., & Anderson, C. (2005). Men, women, and leadership centralization in groups over time. Group Dynamics, 9, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bertjan, D., Ellemers, N., & Spears, R. (1999). Commitment and intergroup behaviour. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 84–106). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Biernat, M. (2003). Toward a broader view of social stereotyping. American Psychologist, 58, 1019–1027.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544–557.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blakemore, J. E. O. (2003). Children’s beliefs about violating gender norms: Boys shouldn’t look like girls, and girls shouldn’t act like boys. Sex Roles, 48, 411–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2003). Counternormative impression management, likeability, and performance ratings: The use of intimidation in an organizational setting. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bowers, C. A., Pharmer, J. A., & Salas, E. (2000). When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 31, 305–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bowles, H. R., Babcock, L., & Lai, L. (2007). Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 84–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burgoon, M., Birk, T. S., & Hall, J. R. (1991). Compliance and satisfaction with physician-patient communication: An expectancy theory interpretation of gender differences. Human Communication Research, 18, 177–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Burgoon, M., Dillard, J. P., & Doran, N. E. (1983). Friendly or unfriendly persuasion: The effects of violations by males and females. Human Communication Research, 10, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Burgoon, M., Jones, S. B., & Stewart, D. (1975). Toward a message-centered theory of persuasion: Three empirical investigations of language intensity. Human Communication Research, 1, 240–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Butler, D., & Geis, F. L. (1990). Nonverbal affect responses to male and female leaders: Implications for leadership evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Buttner, E. H., & McEnally, M. (1996). The interactive effect of influence tactic, applicant gender, and type of job on hiring recommendations. Sex Roles, 34, 581–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 565–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941–951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Carli, L. L. (2001). Assertiveness. In J. Worell (Ed.), Encyclopedia of women and gender: Sex similarities and differences and the impact of society on gender(pp. 157–168). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Carli, L. L. (2001). Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 725–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Carli, L. L. (2006, July). Gender and social influence: Women confront the double bind. Paper presented at the International Congress of Applied Psychology, Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
  27. Carli, L. L., & Bukatko, D. (2000). Gender, communication, and social influence: A developmental perspective. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 295–331). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In G. N. Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 203–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Carli, L. L., LaFleur, S. J., & Loeber, C. C. (1995). Nonverbal behavior, gender, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1030–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Carli, L. L., & Olm-Shipman, C. (2004). Gender differences in task and social behavior: A meta-analytic review. Unpublished research, Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA.Google Scholar
  31. Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review,38, 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Catalyst. (2007). 2006 Catalyst census of women corporate officers and top earners of the Fortune 500. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/18/2006-catalyst-census-of-women-corporate-officers-and-top-earners-of-the-fortune-500
  33. Catalyst. (2008). Women CEOs of the Fortune 1000. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/271/women-ceos-of-the-fortune-1000
  34. Center for American Women and Politics. (2008). Facts on women in Congress, 2008. http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/levels_of_office/Congress_CurrentFacts.php
  35. Chatman, J. A., Boisnier, A. D., Berdahl, J. L., Spataro, S. E., & Anderson, C. (2005). The typical, the rare, and the outnumbered: Disentangling the effects of historical typicality and numerical distinctiveness at work. Working paper, University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
  36. Chatman, J. A., Polzer, J. T., Barsade, S. G., & Neale, M. A. (1998). Being different yet feeling similar: The influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 749–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Chronicle of Higher Education. (1998). Almanac (Vol. 45, No. 1). Washington, DC: Chronicle of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  38. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  39. Copeland, C. L., Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1995). Gender and reactions to dominance. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 53–68.Google Scholar
  40. Craig, J. M., &, Sherif, C. W. (1986). The effectiveness of men and women in problem-solving groups as a function of group gender composition. Sex Roles, 14, 453–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Cummings, A., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. (1993). Demographic differences and employee work outcomes: Effects of multiple comparison groups. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  42. Davison, H. K., & Burke, M. J. (2000). Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. DiBerardinis, J. P., Ramage, K., & Levitt, S. (1984). Risky shift and gender of the advocate: Information theory versus normative theory. Group & Organization Studies, 9, 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Dovidio, J. F., Brown, C. E., Heltman, K., Ellyson, S. L., & Keating, C. F. (1988). Power displays between men and women in discussions of gender-linked tasks: A multichannel study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 580–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Dovidio, J. F., Ellyson, S. L., Keating, C. F., Heltman, K., & Brown, C. E. (1988).The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance between men and women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 233–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Driskell, J., Olmstead, E. B., & Salas, E. (1993). Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  48. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  49. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569–591.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 685–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125–145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ellyson, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Brown, C. E. (1992). The look of power: Gender differences in visual dominance behavior. In C. L. Ridgeway (Ed.), Gender, interaction, and inequality(pp. 50–80). New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  55. Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 293–310.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Erhardt, M. L., Werbel, J. D., & Shrader, C. B. (2003). Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corporate Governance, 11, 102–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Falbo, T., Hazen, M. D., & Linimon, D. (1982). The costs of selecting power bases or messages associated with the opposite sex. Sex Roles, 8, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Feldman-Summers, S., Montano, D. E., Kasprzyk, D., & Wagner, B. (1980). Influence attempts when competing views are gender-related: Sex as credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 311–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Fenwick, G. D., & Neal, D. J. (2001). Effect of group composition on group performance. Gender, Work, and Organization, 8, 206–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Filardo, A. K. (1996). Gender patterns in African American and white adolescents’ social interactions in same-race, mixed-gender groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 71–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Foddy, M., & Graham, H. (1987). Sex and the double standards in the inference of ability. Presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Psychological Association, Vancouver, BC.Google Scholar
  64. Foschi, M. (1996). Double standards in the evaluation of men and women. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 237–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Foschi, M., Lai, L., & Sigerson. K. (1994). Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 326–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Foschi, M., Sigerson, K., & Lebesis, M. (1995). Assessing job applicants: The relative effects of gender, academic record, and decision type. Small Group Research, 26, 328–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Gerrard, M., Breda, C., & Gibbons, F. X. (1990). Gender effects in couples’ decision making and contraceptive use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 449–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Giacalone, R. A., & Riordan, C. A. (1990). Effect of self-presentation on perceptions and recognition in an organization. Journal of Psychology, 124, 25–38.Google Scholar
  70. Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 307–338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Hall, J. A., & Braunwald, K. G. (1981). Gender cues in conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 270–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Hawkins, K. W. (1995). Effects of gender and communication content of leadership emergence in small task-oriented groups. Small Group Research, 26, 234–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., & Martell, R. F. (1995). Sex stereotypes: Do they influence perceptions of managers? Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 237–252.Google Scholar
  74. Heilman, M. E., & Chen. J. J. (2005). Same behavior, different consequences: Reactions to men’s and women’s altruistic citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 431–441.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Heilman, M. E., & Haynes, M. C. (2005). No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women’s success in male–female teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 905–916.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks? The implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed in male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Henry, R. A., Kmet, J., Desrosiers, E., & Landa, A. (2002). Examining the impact of interpersonal cohesiveness on group accuracy interventions: The importance of matching versus buffering. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1996). “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes towards gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Herek, G. M., & Capitanio, J. P. (1999). Sex differences in how heterosexuals think about lesbians and gay men: Evidence from survey context effects. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 348–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Homan, A. C., van Knippenberg, D., Van Kleef, G. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2007). Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: Diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1189–1199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Holtgraves, T., & Lasky, B. (1999). Linguistic power and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 196–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Hultin, M. (2003). Some take the glass escalator, some hit the glass ceiling? Career consequences of occupational sex segregation. Work and Occupations, 30, 30–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Hutson-Comeaux, S. L., & Kelly, R. J. (1996). Sex differences in interaction style and group task performance: The process-performance relationship. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 11, 255–275.Google Scholar
  85. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Izraeli, D. N. (1983). Sex effects or structural effects? An empirical test of Kanter’s theory of proportions. Social Forces, 62, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Izraeli, D. N. (1984). The attitudinal effects of gender mix in union committees. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 37, 212–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Jackson, S. E., May, K. E., & Whitney, K. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of diversity in decision-making teams. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 204–261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  89. Javornisky, G. (1979). Task content and sex differences in conformity. Journal of Psychology, 108, 213–220.Google Scholar
  90. Johnson, C., Clay-Warner, J., & Funk, S. J. (1996). Effects of authority structures and gender on interaction in same sex groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Johnson, R. A., & Schulman, G. I. (1989). Gender-role composition and role entrapment in decision-making groups. Gender & Society, 3, 355–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901–910.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Karakowsky, L., McBey, K., & Miller, D. L. (2004). Gender, perceived competence, and power displays: Examining verbal interruptions in a group context. Small Group Research, 35, 407–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Killen, M., & Naigles, L. R. (1995). Preschool children pay attention to their addressees: Effects of gender composition on peer disputes. Discourse Processes, 19, 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Krishnan, H. A., & Park, D. (2005). A few good women—on top management teams. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1712–1720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. LaFrance, M., Hecht, M. A., & Paluck, E. L. (2003). The contingent smile: A meta-analysis of sex differences in smiling. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 305–334.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Lehavot, K., & Lambert, A. J. (2007). Toward a greater understanding of antigay prejudice: On the role of sexual orientation and gender role violation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 279–292.Google Scholar
  98. Leaper, C., & Ayres, M. M. (2007). A Meta-analytic review of gender variations in adults’ language use: Talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 328–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Levy, G. D., Taylor, M. G., & Gelman, S. A. (1995).Traditional and evaluative aspects of flexibility in gender roles, social conventions, moral rules, and physical laws. Child Development, 66, 515–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Lin, M. H., Kwan, V. S. Y., Cheung, A., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). Stereotype content model explains prejudice for an envied outgroup: Scale of anti-Asian American stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 34–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Lockheed, M. E., (1985). Sex and social influence: A meta-analysis guided by theory. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status, rewards, and influence: How expectations organize behavior(pp. 406–429). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  102. Lockheed, M. E., & Hall, K. P. (1976). Conceptualizing sex as a status characteristic: Application to leadership training strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Madon, S. (1997). What do people believe about gay males? A study of stereotype content and strength. Sex Roles, 37, 663–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Mast, M. S. (2001). Gender differences and similarities in dominance hierarchies in same-gender groups based on speaking time. Sex Roles, 44, 537–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Maume, D. J.,Jr. (2004). Is the glass ceiling a unique form of inequality? Evidence from a random-effects model of managerial attainment. Work and Occupations, 31, 250–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Martin, C. M. (1990). Attitudes and expectations about children with nontraditional and traditional gender roles. Sex Roles, 22, 151–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Matschiner, M., & Murnen, S. K. (1999). Hyperfemininity and influence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 631–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. McCreary, D. R. (1994). The male role and avoiding femininity. Sex Roles, 31, 517–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. McMillan, J. R., Clifton, A. K., McGrath, D., & Gale, W. S. (1977). Women’s language: Uncertainty or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality. Sex Roles, 3, 545–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. McMullen, L. M., & Pasloski, D. D. (1992). Effects of communication apprehension, familiarity of partner, and topic on selected "women’s language" features. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21, 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Meeker, B. F., & Weitzel-O’Neill, P. A. (1985). Sex roles and interpersonal behavior in task-oriented groups. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch (Eds.), Status, rewards, and influence (pp. 379–405). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  112. Mehta, P., Dovidio, J. F., Gibbs, R., Miller, K., Huray, K., Ellyson, S. L., & Brown, C. E. (1989, April). Sex differences in the expression of power motives through visual dominance behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  113. Miller, L. C., Cooke, L. L., Tsang, J., & Morgan, F. (1992). Should I brag? Nature and impact of positive and boastful disclosures for women and men. Human Communication Research, 18, 364–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Myaskovsky, L., Unikel, E., & Dew, M. A. (2005). Effects of gender diversity on performance and interpersonal behavior in small work groups. Sex Roles, 52, 645–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Ott, E. M. (1989). Effects of the male-female ratio at work: Policewomen and male nurses. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Pelled, L. H. (1996). Relational demography and perceptions of group conflict and performance: A field investigation. International Journal of Conflict Management, 7, 230–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Pelled, L. H., Cummings, T. G., & Kizilos, M. A. (2000). The influence of organizational demography on customer-oriented prosocial behavior: An exploratory investigation. Journal of Business Research 47, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Pelled, L. H., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Xin, K. R. (1999). Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Piliavin, J. A., & Martin, R. R. (1978). The effects of sex composition of groups on style of social interaction. Sex Roles, 4, 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Prentice, D. A., & Carranzo, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Pugh, M. D., & Wahrman, R. (1983). Neutralizing sexism in mixed-sex groups: Do women have to be better than men? American Journal of Sociology, 88, 746–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Propp, K. M. (1995). An experimental examination of biological sex as a status cue in decision-making groups and its influence on information use. Small Group Research, 26, 451–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Randel, A. E. (2002). Identity salience: A moderator of the relationship between group gender composition and work group conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 749–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Reed, V., & Buddeberg-Fischer, B. (2001). Career obstacles for women in medicine: An overview. Medical Education, 35, 139–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Rhoads, K. V., & Cialdini, R. B. (2002). The business of influence: Principles that lead to success in commercial settings. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 513–542). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  126. Rhode, D. L. (2001). The unfinished agenda: Women and the legal profession. Chicago: American Bar Association, Commission on Women in the Profession.Google Scholar
  127. Ridgeway, C. L. (1978). Conformity, group-oriented motivation, and status attainment in small groups. Social Psychology, 41, 175–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Ridgeway, C. L. (1981). Nonconformity, competence, and influence in groups: A test of two theories. American Sociological Review, 46, 333–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Ridgeway, C. L. (1982). Status in groups: The importance of motivation. American Sociological Review, 47, 76–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Ridgeway, C. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 637–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Riordan, C. M., & Shore, L. M. (1997). Demographic diversity and employee attitudes: An empirical examination of relational demography within work units. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 342–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Rogelberg, S. G., & Rumery, S. M. (1996). Gender diversity, team decision quality, time on task, and interpersonal cohesion. Small Group Research, 27, 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Rosette, A. S., Leonardelli, G. J., & Phillips, K. (2008). The White standard: Racial bias in leader categorization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 758–777.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629–645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Sackett, P. R., DuBois, C. L. Z., & Noe, A. W. (1991). Tokenism in performance evaluation: The effects of work group representation on male-female and White-Black differences in performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Scott, K. A., & Brown, D. J. (2006). Female first, leader second? Gender bias in the encoding of leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 230–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Shackelford, S., Wood, W., & Worchel, S. (1996). Behavioral styles and the influence of women in mixed-sex groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 284–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Schneider, J., & Cook, K. (1995). Status inconsistency and gender: Combining revisited. Small Group Research, 26, 372–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Schope, R. D., & Eliason, M. J. (2004). Sissies and tomboys: Gender role behaviors and homophobia. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 16, 73–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Schruijer, S. G. L., & Mostert, I. (1997). Creativity and sex composition: An experimental illustration. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 6, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Sczesny, S. (2003). A closer look beneath the surface: Various facets of the think-manager—think-male stereotype. Sex Roles, 49, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Sirin, S. R., McCreary, D. R., & Mahalik, J. R. (2004). Differential reactions to men and women’s gender role transgressions: Perceptions of social status, sexual orientation, and value dissimilarity. Journal of Men’s Studies, 12, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Smetana, J. G. (1986). Preschool children’s conceptions of sex-role transgressions, Child Development, 57, 862–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Stein, R. T., & Heller, T. (1979). An empirical analysis between leadership status and participation rates reported in the literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1993–2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Sterling, B. S., & Owen, J. W. (1982). Perceptions of demanding versus reasoning male and female police officers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 336–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Stoddard, T., & Turiel, E. (1985). Children’s concepts of cross-gender activities. Child Development, 56, 1241–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Tajfel, H. (1982). The social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Taps, J., & Martin, P. Y. (1990). Gender composition, attributional accounts, and women’s influence and likability in task groups. Small Group Research, 21, 471–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Tepper, B. J., Brown, S. J., & Hunt, M. D. (1993). Strength of subordinates’ upward influence tactics and gender congruency effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1903–1919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Phillips, K. W. (2004). When what you know is not enough: Expertise and gender dynamics in task groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1585–1598.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Twenge, J. M. (1997). Attitudes toward women, 1970–1995. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Uhlmann, E. L., & Cohen, G. L. (2005). Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychological Science, 16, 474–480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008a). Highlights of women’s earnings in 2007. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2007.pdf
  156. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2008b). Tables from employment and earnings: Annual averages, household data. http://www.bls.gov/cps/tables.htm#annual
  157. U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2003). Women’s earnings: Work patterns partially explain difference between men’s and women’s earnings(GAO-04-35). http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0435.pdf
  158. U.S. National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Digest of education statistics, 2005. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_258.asp.
  159. van Engen, M. L., & Willemsen, T. M. (2004). Sex and leadership styles: A meta-analysis of research published in the 1990s. Psychological Reports, 94, 3–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007).Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  161. Wagner, D. G., Ford, R. S., & Ford, T. W. (1986). Can gender inequalities be reduced? American Sociological Review, 51, 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Walker, H. A., Ilardi, B. C., McMahon, A. M., & Fennell, M. L. (1996). Gender, interaction, and leadership. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Webber, S. S., & Donahue L. M. (2001). Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 27, 141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Weimann, G. (1985). Sex differences in dealing with bureaucracy. Sex Roles, 12, 777–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. Wheelan, S. A. (1996). Effects of gender composition and group status differences on member perceptions of group developmental patterns, effectiveness, and productivity. Sex Roles, 34,665–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Wheelan, S. A., & Verdi, A. F. (1992). Differences in male and female patterns of communication in groups: A methodological artifact? Sex Roles, 27, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex stereotypes: A multinational study. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  169. Williams K. Y., & O’Reilly C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140Google Scholar
  170. Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 53–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Wood, W., & Kallgren, C. A. (1988). Communicator attributes and persuasion: Recipients’ access to attitude-relevant information in memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 172–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Wood, W., & Karten, S. J. (1986). Sex differences in interaction style as a product of perceived sex differences in competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 341–347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Wosinska, W., Dabul, A. J., Whetstone-Dion, R., & Cialdini, R. B. (1996). Self-presentational responses to success in the organization: The costs and benefits of modesty. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 18, 229–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Yamada, E. M., Tjosvold, D., & Draguns, J. G. (1983). Effects of sex-linked situations and sex composition on cooperation and style of interaction. Sex Roles, 9, 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Yoder, J. D. (2001). Making leadership work more effectively for women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 815–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Yoder, J. D. (2002). Context matters: Understanding tokenism processes and their impact on women’s work. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  177. Yoder, J. D., & Schleicher, T. L. (1996). Undergraduates regard deviation from occupational gender stereotypes as costly for women. Sex Roles, 34, 171–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Yoder, J. D., Schleicher, T. L., & McDonald, T. W. (1998). Empowering token women leaders: The importance of organizationally legitimated credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 209–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. Zucker, K. J., Wilson-Smith, D. N., Kurita, J. A., & Stern, A. (1995). Children’s appraisals of sex-typed behavior in their peers. Sex Roles, 33, 703–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda L. Carli
    • 1
  1. 1.Wellesley CollegeWellesleyUSA

Personalised recommendations