Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine someof the factors that influence outside reviewers andsearch committee members when they are reviewingcurricula vitae, particularly with respect to the gender of the name on the vitae. The participants inthis study were 238 male and female academicpsychologists who listed a university address in the1997 Directory of the American PsychologicalAssociation. They were each sent one of four versions of acurriculum vitae (i.e., female job applicant, male jobapplicant, female tenure candidate, and male tenurecandidate), along with a questionnaire and aself-addressed stamped envelope. All the curricula vitaeactually came from a real-life scientist at twodifferent stages in her career, but the names werechanged to traditional male and female names. Althoughan exclusively between-groups design was used to avoidsparking genderconscious responding, the resultsindicate that the participants were clearly able todistinguish between the qualifications of the jobapplicants versus the tenure candidates, as evidenced bysuggesting higher starting salaries, increasedlikelihood of offering the tenure candidates a job,granting them tenure, and greater respect for theirteaching, research, and service records. Both men andwomen were more likely to vote to hire a male jobapplicant than a female job applicant with an identicalrecord. Similarly, both sexes reported that the male job applicant had done adequate teaching,research, and service experience compared to the femalejob applicant with an identical record. In contrast,when men and women examined the highly competitive curriculum vitae of the real-life scientist whohad gotten early tenure, they were equally likely totenure the male and female tenure candidates and therewas no difference in their ratings of their teaching, research, and service experience. There was nosignificant main effect for the quality of theinstitution or professional rank on selectivity inhiring and tenuring decisions. The results of this study indicate a gender bias for both men and womenin preference for male job applicants.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Alper, J. (1993). The pipeline is leaking women all the way along. Science, 260, 409–411.
American Psychological Association. (1997). Directory of the American Psycho logical Association. Washington, DC: Author.
Applegate, W. B., & Williams, M. E. (1990). Career development in academic medicine. American Journal of Medicine, 88, 263–267.
Black, M. M., & Holden, E. W. (1998). The impact of gender on productivity and satisfaction among medical school psychologists. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 5, 117–131.
Branscombe, N. R., & Smith, E. R. (1990). Gender and racial stereotypes in impression formation and social decision-making processes. Sex Roles, 22, 627–647.
Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 565–576.
Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941–951.
Clance, P. R. (1985). The Imposter Phenomenon:When Success Makes You Feel Like A Fake. New York: Bantom Books.
Cole, S., Cole, J. R. & Simon, G. A. (1981). Chance and consensus in peer review. Science, 214, 881–886.
Costrich, N., Feinstein, J., Kidder, L., Maracek, J., & Pascale, L. (1975). When stereotypes hurt: Three studies of penalties for sex-role reversals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 520–530.
Dreher, G. F., & Ash, R. A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professional, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 539–546.
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.
Ernst, E., Resch, K. L., & Uher, E. M. (1992). Reviewer Bias. Annals of Internal Medicine, 116, 958.
Fagenson, E. A. (1989). The mentor advantage: Perceive d career/job experience s of proteges vs. non-proteges. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 309–320.
Fidell, L. S. (1970). Empirical verification of sex discrimination in hiring practices in psychology. American Psychologist, 25, 1094–1098.
Gallois, C., Callan, V.J., & Palmer, J. A. M. (1993). The influence of applicant communication style and interviewer characteristics on hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1041–1060.
Hallock, P. (1994). Promoting diversity on campus: Thought to action. Thought and Action, X, 65–78.
Herbold, H. (1995). Women who leave: Why women professors are cutting their ties to academia. The Monthly Forum On Women In Higher Education, 25–29.
Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal networks of women and minorities in management: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 18, 56–87.
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Wade, M. B. (1996). The dilemma of se lf-advocacy for women: Another case of blaming the victim? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 15(2), 143–152.
Kasof, J. (1993). Sex bias in the name of stimulus persons. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 140–163.
Linehan, M. M., & Seifert, R. F. (1983). Sex and contextual differences in the appropriateness of assertive behavior. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 8, 79–88.
Liss, L. (1975). Why academic women do not revolt: Implications for affirmative action. Sex Roles, 1, 209–230.
McNevin, S.H., Leichner, P., Harper, D., & McCrimmon, E. (1985). Sex role ideology among health care professionals. Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa, 10, 21–23.
Morrison, A. M., & Von Glinow, M. A. (1990). Women and minorities in management. American Psychologist, 45, 200–208.
National Research Council (1995). Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States: Continuity and Change, pp. 371–377.
Ng, C. F. (1997). Recruitment practices and job search for academic positions in psychology. Canadian Psycho logy, 38, 25–42.
Northcraft, G. B., & Gutek, B. A. (1993). Point-counterpoint: Discrimination against women—Going, going, gone or going but never gone? In E. A. Fagenson (Ed.), Women In Management: Trends, issues and challenges in managerial diversity (pp. 219–245). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ohlott, P. J., Ruderman, M. N., & McCauley, C. D. (1994). Gender differences in managers' developmental job experiences. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 46–67.
O'Leary, V. E., & Wallston, B. S. (1982). Women, gender, and social psychology. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 9–43.
Ozawa, K., Crosby, M., & Crosby, F. (1996). Individuals and resistance to affirmative action: A comparison of Japanese and American samples. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1138–1152.
Parker, C. P., Baltes, B. B., & Christiansen, N. D. (1997). Support for affirmative action, justice perceptions, and work attitudes: A study of gender and racial-ethnic group differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 376–389.
Ragins, B. R. (1999). Where do we go from here, and how do we get there? Methodological issues in conducting research on diversity and mentoring relationships. In A. J., Murrell, F. J. Crosby & R. J. Ely (Eds). Mentoring Dilemmas: Developmental Relationships Within Multicultural Organizations (pp. 227–246). Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1991). Easier said than done: Gender differences in perceived barriers to gaining a mentor. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 939–951.
Ragins, B. R. & McFarlin, D. (1990). Perception of mentor roles in cross-gender mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 37, 321–339.
Ragins, B. R., Townsend, B. & Mattis, M. (1998). Gender gap in the executive suite: CEOs and female executives report on breaking the glass ceiling. Academy of Management Executive, 12, 28–42.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1982). Status in groups: The importance of motivation. American Sociological Review, 47, 175–188.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Diekema, D. (1992). In C. L. Ridgeway (Ed.), Gender, interaction, and inequty (pp. 157–180). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Rothblum, E. D. (1988). Leaving the ivory tower: Factors contributing to women's voluntary resignation from academia. Frontiers, 2, 14–17.
Rudman, L. A. (1995). To be or not to be (self-promoting): Motivational influences on gender stereotyping. Poster presented at the 7th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Society, New York.
Scandura, T. A. (1992). Mentorship and career mobility: An empirical investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 169–174.
Sheehan, E. P., McDe vitt, T. M., & Ross, H. C. (1998). Looking for a job as a psychology professor? Factors affecting applicant success. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 8–11.
Sonnert, G., & Holton,G. (1996). Career patterns of women and men in the sciences. American Scientist, 84, 63.
Tesch, B. J., Wood, H. M., Helwig, A. L., & Nattinger, A. B. (1995). Promotion of women physicians in academic medicine: Glass ceiling or sticky floor? Journal of the American Medical Association, 273(13), 1022–1025.
Turban, D. B., & Dougherty, T.W. (1994). Role of proteégeé personality in receipt of mentoring and career success. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 688–702.
Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wenneras, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387, 341–343.
Widom, C. S., & Burke, B. W. (1978). Performance, attitudes, and professional socialization of women in academia. Sex Roles, 4, 549–562.
Wiley, M. G., & Eskilson, A. (1985). Speech style, gender stereotypes, and corporate success: What if women talk more like men? Sex Roles, 12, 993–1006.
Willis, F. N., & Diebold, C. T. (1997). Producing mentors in psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 24, 15–21.
Wunder, G. C., & Wynn, G. W. (1988). The effects of address personalization on mailed questionnaires response rate, time, and quality. Journal of the Market Research Society, 30, 95–101.
Zebrowitz, L. A., Tenenbaum, D. R., & Goldstein, L. H. (1991). The impact of job applicant's facial maturity, gender, and academic achievement on hiring recommendations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 525–548.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Steinpreis, R.E., Anders, K.A. & Ritzke, D. The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study. Sex Roles 41, 509–528 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018839203698
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018839203698