The durability of gender inequality in contemporary societies raises questions about the development and diffusion of inegalitarian beliefs about the roles of men and women in politics and economics. Recent comparative research suggests the empowerment of women in politics is important for promoting egalitarian beliefs about women in authoritative political roles. This study extends on this perspective by examining how female empowerment in politics and economics interplays with beliefs about the relative competency of women in these institutions. We argue the empowerment of women in politics and economics is important for reducing inegalitarian beliefs about women in these institutions, but the prevalence of these beliefs hinders female empowerment in these institutions. We test these arguments using data on 86,324 respondents in 51 countries from the fifth and sixth waves of the World Value Survey. Estimates from hierarchal linear models show individuals possess more egalitarian beliefs about women in countries with greater female empowerment in politics and economics and this effect is amplified among male respondents. In addition, estimates from seemingly unrelated regression models show the prevalence of inegalitarian gender beliefs among both men and women is associated with lower levels of female empowerment. However, the prevalence of these beliefs among male respondents exerts the greatest effect on female empowerment in politics and economics. Overall, this study shows gender beliefs and the empowerment of women in politics and economics act as mutually constitutive forces of gender inequality and ideologies in contemporary society.
AlexanderAC (2012) Change in women’s descriptive representation and the belief in women’s ability to govern: A virtuous cycle. Politics & Gender8(4): 437–464.
2.
AlexanderACWelzelC (2011) Empowering women: The role of emancipative beliefs. European Sociological Review27(3): 364–384.
3.
AlexanderACWelzelC (2015) Eroding patriarchy: The co-evolution of women’s rights and emancipative values. International Review of Sociology25(1): 144–165.
4.
AlexanderACBolzendahlCJalalziF (2016) Defining women’s global political empowerment: Theories and evidence. Sociological Compass10(6): 432–441.
5.
AlexanderACBolzendahlCJalalziF (2018) Measuring Women’s Political Empowerment across the Globe: Strategies, Challenges and Future Research. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
6.
AndréSGesthuizenMScheepersP (2013) Support for traditional female roles across 32 countries: Female labour market participation, policy models and gender differences. Comparative Sociology12: 447–476.
7.
AtkesonLRCarrilloN (2007) More is better: The influence of collective female descriptive representation on external efficacy. Politics & Gender3(1): 79–101.
8.
BanaszakLAPlutzerE (1993) Contextual determinants of feminist attitudes: National and subnational influences in Western Europe. American Political Science Review87(1): 147–157.
9.
BarnesTDBurchardSM (2013) “Engendering” politics: The impact of descriptive representation on women’s political engagement in sub-Saharan Africa. Comparative Political Studies46(7): 767–790.
10.
BaxterJKaneEW (1995) Dependence and independence: A cross-national analysis of gender inequality and gender attitudes. Gender & Society9(2): 193–215.
11.
BeamanLChattopadhyayRDufloE, et al. (2009) Powerful women: Does exposure reduce bias?Quarterly Journal of Economics124(4): 1497–1540.
12.
BiernatMFuegenK (2001) Shifting standards and the evaluation of competence: Complexity in gender-based judgment and decision making. Journal of Social Issues57(4): 707–724.
13.
BlauFDKahnLM (2007) The gender pay gap: Have women gone as far as they can?Academy of Management Perspective21(1): 7–23.
14.
BolzendahlCIMyersDJ (2004) Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974–1998. Social Forces83(2): 759–789.
15.
BrashearsME (2008) Sex, society, and association: A cross-national examination of status construction theory. Social Psychological Quarterly71(1): 72–85.
16.
BryanMLJenkinsSP (2015) Multilevel modelling of country effects: A cautionary tale. The European Sociological Review32(1): 3–22.
17.
BulandaRE (2004) Paternal involvement with children: The influence of gender ideologies. Journal of Marriage and Family66(1): 40–45.
18.
CharlesworthH (1994) What are women’s international human rights? In: CookRJ (ed.) Human Rights of Women. Philadelphia, PA: University of Philadelphia Press, pp. 49–91.
19.
CloggCCPetkovaEHaritouA (1995) Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology100(5): 1261–1293.
20.
ConstantinAVoicuM (2015) Attitudes towards gender roles in cross-cultural surveys: Content validity and cross-cultural measurement invariance. Social Indicators Research123(3): 733–751.
21.
CuddyAJCFiskeSTGlickP (2007) The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology92(4): 631–648.
22.
DahlerupD (2006) Women, Quotas and Politics. New York: Routledge.
23.
DahlerupDFreidenvallL (2005) Quotas as a “fast track” to equal representation of women: Why Scandinavia is no longer the model. International Feminist Journal of Politics7(1): 26–48.
24.
DavidovEMeulmanBCieciuchJ, et al. (2014) Measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Annual Review of Sociology40: 55–75.
25.
DavidsonMJCooperCL (1992) Shattering the Glass Ceiling: The Woman Manager. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
26.
DavisSNGreensteinTN (2009) Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology35(1): 87–105.
27.
EaglyAHCarliLL (2007) Through the Labyrinth: The Truth about How Women Become Leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
28.
EaglyAHKarauSJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review109(3): 573–598.
29.
FiskeST (2011) Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us. New York: Russell SAGE Foundation.
30.
FiskeSTCuddyAJCGlickP, et al. (2002) A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology82(6): 878–902.
31.
FoschiM (2000) Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology26(1): 21–42.
32.
FoschiMLaiLSigersonK (1994) Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly57(4): 326–339.
33.
FranceschetSPiscopoJM (2008) Gender quotas and women’s substantive representation: Lessons from Argentina. Politics & Gender4(3): 393–425.
34.
FuwaM (2004) Macro-level gender inequality and the division of household labor in 22 countries. American Sociological Review69(6): 751–767.
35.
GriffthsWESkeelsCLChotikapanichD (2002) Sample size requirements for estimation in SUR models. In: UllahAWanAChaturvediA (eds) Handbook of Applied Econometrics and Satistical Inference. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, pp. 575–590.
36.
HansenSB (1997) Talking about politics: Gender and contextual effects on political proselytizing. The Journal of Politics59(1): 73–103.
37.
HeilmanMEBlockCJMartellRF (1995) Sex stereotypes: Do they influence perceptions of managers?Journal of Social Behavior & Personality10(4): 237–252.
38.
HeilmanMEWallenASFuchsD, et al. (2004) Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology89(3): 416–427.
39.
HeisigJPSchaefferM (2019) Why you should always include a random slope for the lower-level variable in a cross-level interaction. European Sociological Review35(2): 258–279.
40.
HookJL (2010) Gender inequality in the welfare state: Sex segregation in housework, 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology115(5): 1480–1523.
41.
HtunMNJonesMP (2002) Engendering the right to participate in decision-making: Electoral quotas and women’s leadership in Latin America. In: CraskeNMolyneuxM (eds) Gender and the Politics of Rights and Democracy in Latin America. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 32–56.
42.
InglehartRNorrisP (2003) Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
InglehartRFPonarinEInglehartRC (2017) Cultural change, slow and fast: The distinctive trajectory of norms governing gender equality and sexual orientation. Social Forces95(4): 1313–1340.
JalalzaiF (2013) Shattered, Cracked, or Firmly Intact? Women and the Executive Glass Ceiling Worldwide. New York: Oxford University Press.
46.
KabeerN (1999) Resources, agency, achievements: Reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Development and Change30(3): 435–464.
47.
KrookML (2010) Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
48.
KunovichRMKunovichS (2008) Gender dependence and attitudes toward the distribution of household labor: A comparative and multilevel analysis. International Journal of Comparative Sociology49(6): 395–427.
49.
KwonRMahutgaMCAdmireA (2017) Promoting patriarchy or dual equality? Multiculturalism and the immigrant household division of labor. The Sociological Quarterly58(3): 373–404.
50.
LevanonAEnglandPAllisonA (2009) Occupational feminization and pay: Assessing causal dynamics using 1950–2000 U.S. Census data. Social Forces88(2): 865–891.
51.
LomazziV (2018) Using alignment optimization to test measurement invariance of gender role attitudes in 59 countries. Methods, Data, Analyses (Mda)12(1): 77–103.
52.
LueptowLBGarovich-SzaboLLueptowMB (2001) Social change and the persistence of sex typing: 1974–1997. Social Forces80(1): 1–36.
53.
LynessKSJudieschMK (1999) Are women more likely to be hired or promoted in management positions?Journal of Vocational Behavior54(1): 158–173.
54.
LynessKSJudieschMK (2001) Are female managers quitters? The relationships of gender, promotions, and family leaves of absence to voluntary turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology86(6): 1167–1178.
55.
MahutgaMCurranMRobertsA (2018) Job tasks and the comparative structure of income and employment: Routine task intensity and offshorability for the LIS. International Journal of Comparative Sociology59(2): 81–109.
56.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Should Blacks represent Blacks and women represent women?Journal of Politics61(3): 628–657.
MooreLMVannemanR (2003) Context matters: Effects of the proportion of fundamentalists on gender attitudes. Social Forces82(1): 115–139.
59.
MorganJBuiceM (2013) Latin American attitudes toward women in politics: The influence of elite cues, female advancement, and individual characteristics. The American Political Science Review107(4): 644–662.
60.
NeelyM (2018) Fit to be king: How patrimonialism on wall street leads to inequality. Socio-Economic Review16(2): 365–385.
61.
PaternosterRBrameRMazerolleP, et al. (1998) Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology36(4): 859–866.
62.
PaxtonPKunovichSHughesMM (2007) Gender in politics. Annual Review of Sociology33(1): 263–284.
63.
PhillipsA (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
PodolnyJM (2010) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65.
RaudenbushSWBrykAS (2002) Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
66.
RidgewayCL (2011) Framed by Gender: How Gender Inequality Persists in the Modern World. New York: Oxford University Press.
67.
RidgewayCL (2013) Why status matters for inequality. American Sociological Review79(1): 1–16.
68.
RidgewayCLBalkwellJW (1997) Group processes and the diffusion of status beliefs. Social Psychology Quarterly60(1): 14–31.
69.
RidgewayCLBoyleEHKuipersKJRobinsonDT (1998) How do status beliefs develop? The role of resources and interactional experience. American Sociological Review63(3): 331–350.
70.
RidgewayCLCorrellSJ (2004) Unpacking the gender system: a theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society18(4): 510–531.
71.
RidgewayCLEricksonKG (2000) Creating and spreading status beliefs. American Journal of Sociology106(3): 579–615.
72.
RismanB (2004) Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society18(4): 429–450.
73.
RudmanLAFairchildK (2004) Reactions to counter stereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology87(2): 157–176.
74.
RudmanLAGlickP (2001) Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues57(4): 743–762.
75.
RudmanLAMoss-RacusinCAPhelanJE, et al. (2012) Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology48(1): 165–179.
76.
RyanMKHaslamSA (2007) The glass cliff: Exploring the dynamics surrounding the appointment of women to precarious leadership positions. Academy of Management Review32(2): 549–572.
77.
SauderMLynnFPodolnyJM (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Review of Sociology38(1): 267–283.
78.
SunderM (2003) Piercing the veil. The Yale Law Journal112(6): 1399–1472.
79.
SungH-E (2003) Fairer sex of fairer system? Gender and corruption revisited. Social Forces82(2): 703–723.
80.
ThyeSR (2000) A status value theory of power in exchange relations. American Sociological Review65(3): 407–432.
81.
TillyC (1998) Durable Inequality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
82.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2006, 2010) Human Development Report. New York: Oxford University Press.
83.
Van De MeerTTe GrotenhuisMPelzerB (2010) Influential cases in multilevel modeling. American Sociological Review75: 173–178.
84.
WilliamsJEBestDL (1990) Measuring Sex Stereotypes: A Multination Study. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
85.
World Development Indicators (2014) World Bank world indicators database. Available at: http://databank.worldbank.org/ (accessed 3 June 2017).
86.
World Values Survey Association (2010) World Values Survey 2010 official data file, v.20181015. Available at: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp (accessed 3 June 2017).
87.
ZellnerA (1962) An efficient model of estimating seemingly unrelated regression equations and tests of aggregate bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association57(298): 348–368.
