Are Leader Stereotypes Masculine? A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms
Are Leader Stereotypes Masculine? A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0023557
复制
发表时间：
2011-07-01
影响因子：
22.4
通讯作者：
Ristikari, Tiina
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Koenig, Anne M.;Eagly, Alice H.;Ristikari, Tiina
这项元分析考察了对领导者的刻板印象在多大程度上是文化上的男性。主要研究符合三种范式中的一种：(A)在Schein(1973)的Think Manager-Think男性范式中，40项研究的51个效应量比较了男性和领导刻板印象的相似性，以及女性和领导者刻板印象的相似性；(B)在Powell和Butterfield(1979)的代理交流范式中，22项研究的47个效应量比较了领导的代理和交流的刻板印象；(C)在希纳(1975)的男性化-女性化范式中，7项研究的101效应量代表了领导相关职业在单一的男性化-女性化维度上的刻板印象。分析采用了适当的随机和混合效应模型。所有三种范式都显示出领导者刻板印象的总体男性特征：(A)在思维管理者思考男性范式中，女性与领导者相似性的组内相关性=0.25，男性与领导者相似性的组内相关性=0.62；(B)在机构交流范式中，g=1.55，表明更具代理能力，而不是交流；(C)在男性化-女性化范式中，g=0.92，表明男性气概强于雌雄同体量表的中点。亚组和元回归分析表明，这种对领导力的男性解释随着时间的推移而减少，并且在研究参与者中男性比女性更多。此外，刻板印象将教育组织中的领导者描绘成比其他领域的领导者更不男性化，在中等水平的领导者中也比在高地位的领导者角色中更具男子气概。本文考察了这些发现与Eagly和Karau(2002)的角色一致性理论之间的关系，该理论提出了语境对女性和领导者刻板印象之间不一致性的影响。还考虑了对女性领导人的偏见所产生的影响。
This meta-analysis examined the extent to which stereotypes of leaders are culturally masculine. The primary studies fit into 1 of 3 paradigms: (a) In Schein's (1973) think manager-think male paradigm, 40 studies with 51 effect sizes compared the similarity of male and leader stereotypes and the similarity of female and leader stereotypes; (b) in Powell and Butterfield's (1979) agency-communion paradigm, 22 studies with 47 effect sizes compared stereotypes of leaders' agency and communion; and (c) in Shinar's (1975) masculinity-femininity paradigm, 7 studies with 101 effect sizes represented stereotypes of leadership-related occupations on a single masculinity-femininity dimension. Analyses implemented appropriate random and mixed effects models. All 3 paradigms demonstrated overall masculinity of leader stereotypes: (a) In the think manager think male paradigm, intraclass correlation = .25 for the women-leaders similarity and intraclass correlation = .62 for the men-leaders similarity; (b) in the agency-communion paradigm, g = 1.55, indicating greater agency than communion; and (c) in the masculinity-femininity paradigm, g = 0.92, indicating greater masculinity than the androgynous scale midpoint. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses indicated that this masculine construal of leadership has decreased over time and was greater for male than female research participants. In addition, stereotypes portrayed leaders as less masculine in educational organizations than in other domains and in moderate- than in high-status leader roles. This article considers the relation of these findings to Eagly and Karau's (2002) role congruity theory, which proposed contextual influences on the incongruity between stereotypes of women and leaders. The implications for prejudice against women leaders are also considered.