The “Big Two” in Hiring Discrimination: Evidence From a Cross-National Field Experiment - this research proves discrimination of male in some jobs and that female privilege exist

JohnGawel · 2021-10-30T16:29:00+00:00

A female premium

Many previous studies on the SCM have focused on gender. Empirical research has repeatedly shown that women are perceived as being higher in warmth but lower in competence than men (Fiske, 2017; Rudman & Glick, 1999). This ambivalent stereotype is a source of disadvantage for females on the labor market, where being perceived as competent is essential for success. In line with this reasoning, previous meta-analyses on gender discrimination in hiring have confirmed a penalty for female job candidates (Koch et al., 2015; Olian et al., 1988). This gender penalty, however, is rather small in size and tends to disappear, and even reverse, in applications for female-dominated jobs, as shown in both simulated and real hiring situations (Davison & Burke, 2000; Riach & Rich, 2002).

In addition, across all occupations, employers significantly favored female job candidates over male ones (b = –.05, p < .01) and response rates were significantly higher in high-skilled jobs (b = .13, p < .01) and significantly lower in jobs with higher levels of customer contact (b = –.13, p < .01).

Despite equal qualifications, male job candidates had about five percentage points lower chances of receiving a positive response than female candidates. This result is, at prima facie, surprising given the extensive literature of labor market discrimination to the disadvantage of women. It should be noted, though, that this female advantage is limited to female-dominated occupations and to women from the majority group, as we show in another study (Di Stasio & Larsen, 2020; see also Birkelund et al., 2019).

As an example, and in line with previous findings on gender stereotypes (Fiske, 2017; Rudman & Glick, 1999), our validation study showed that women were in general perceived as warmer than men. Given the female premium we found in the main study, it might be that warmth actually did play a role in the hiring decisions, but not through self-accredited warmth in the application letter but through group membership and associated stereotypes.

Despite equal qualifications, in our study, employers clearly favored female job candidates over male ones

Gender stereotypes are harmful for men. Narration about female discrimination caused by patriarchy is false.

NoMarriageNoKids · 2021-10-30T20:39:30+00:00

I've worked in offices with mostly women and well as offices with most,y men. The man-dominated offices were fun, jovial, productive, and relatively drama-free. The female-dominated officers were catty, full of gossip and backbiting, unproductive and disruptive, loud, and full of drama.

Most hiring managers wouldn't hire most women if the discrimination laws didn't force them to. That's a fact.

totoroloco_phd · 2021-10-31T19:00:37+00:00

I work in the tech industry and I have seen several Engineering Managers been told to hire only black women. Literally.

EwokCafe · 2021-11-03T20:53:10+00:00

Ooh fascinating study, thanks for sharing!

Title	The “Big Two” in Hiring Discrimination: Evidence From a Cross-National Field Experiment - this research proves discrimination of male in some jobs and that female privilege exist
Author	JohnGawel
Upvotes	24
Comments	12
Date	October 30, 2021 4:18 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/AntiFeminists
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/qj4sw4/the_big_two_in_hiring_discrimination_evidence/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/AntiFeminists/the-big-two-in-hiring-discrimination-evidence-from.1080944 https://theredarchive.com/post/1080944

Comments

A female premium