Two studies tested the hypothesis that females penalize women who succeed in male gender-typed jobs to salvage their own self-views regarding competence. The authors proposed that women are motivated to penalize successful women (i.e., characterize them as unlikable and interpersonally hostile) to minimize the self-evaluative consequences of social comparison with a highly successful female target. Results supported the hypothesis. Whereas both male and female participants penalized successful women, blocking this penalization reduced female—but not male—participants' self-ratings of competence (Study 1). Moreover, positive feedback provided to female participants about their potential to succeed (Study 2) weakened negative reactions to successful women without costs to subsequent self-ratings of competence. These results suggest that the interpersonal derogation of successful women by other women functions as a self-protective strategy against threatening upward social comparisons.
Allen, T.D., & Rush, M.C. (1998). The effects of organizational citizenship behavior on performance judgments: A field study and laboratory experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 247-260.
2.
Brewer, M.B., Dull, V., & Lui, L. (1981). Perceptions of the elderly: Stereotypes as prototypes . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 656-670.
3.
Brickman, P., & Bulman, R.J. (1977). Pleasure and pain in social comparison. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes: Theoretical and empirical perspectives (pp. 149-186). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
4.
Brown, J.D., Novick, N.J., Lord, K.A., & Richards, J.M. (1992). When Gulliver travels: Social context, psychological closeness, and self-appraisals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 717-727.
5.
Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are, who women should be: Descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 665-692.
6.
Cardy, R.L., & Dobbins, G.H. (1986). Affect and appraisal accuracy: Liking as an integral dimension in evaluating performance. Journal of Applied Psychology , 71, 672-678.
7.
Casciaro, T., & Lobo, M.S. (2005). Competent jerks, lovable fools, and the formation of social networks. Harvard Business Review, 83(6), 92-99.
8.
Cash, T., Cash, D., & Butters, J. (1983). “Mirror, mirror, on the wall…”: Contrast effects and self-evaluations of physical attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 351-358.
9.
Cialdini, R.B., Borden, R.J., Thorne, A., Walker, M.R., Freeman, S., & Slone, L.R. (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 366-375.
10.
Eagly, A.H. (2000). Gender roles. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 448-453). Washington, DC: APA Books.
11.
Fein, S., & Spencer, S.J. (1997). Prejudice as self-image maintenance: Affirming the self through derogating others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 31-44.
12.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
13.
Fiske, S.T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, & discrimination . In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 357-414). New York: McGraw-Hill.
14.
Fiske, S.T., Bersoff, D.N., Borgida, E., Deaux, K., & Heilman, M.E. (1991). Social science research on trial: Use of sex stereotyping research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. American Psychologist , 46, 1049-1060.
15.
Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-congenial environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership . Sex Roles, 55, 51-61.
16.
Gilbert, D.T., Giesler, R.B., & Morris, K.A. (1995). When comparisons arise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 227-236.
17.
Heilman, M.E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model . In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 269-298). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
18.
Heilman, M.E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657-674.
19.
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.
20.
Heilman, M.E., & Okimoto, T.G. (2007). Averting penalties for women's success: Rectifying the perceived communality deficiency. Journal of Applied Psychology , 92, 81-92.
21.
Heilman, M.E., & Parks-Stamm, E.J. (2007). Gender stereotypes in the workplace: Obstacles to women's career progress. In S. J. Correll (Ed.), Social psychology of gender: Advances in group processes (Vol. 24, pp. 47-77). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
22.
Heilman, M.E., & Wallen, A.S. (2007). Men as wimpy and women as bitchy: Penalties for managers whose success violates gender stereotypic norms. Unpublished manuscript.
23.
Heilman, M.E., Wallen, A.S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M.M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89, 416-427.
24.
Jost, J.T., & Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-27.
25.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480-498.
26.
Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K.C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565-579.
27.
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 73, 91-103.
28.
Lyness, K.S. (2002). Finding the key to the executive suite: Challenges for women and people of color. In R. Silzer (Ed.), The 21st century executive: Innovative practices for building leadership at the top (pp. 229-273). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
29.
Major, B., Sciacchitano, A., & Crocker, J. (1993). Ingroup vs. out-group comparisons and self-esteem . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 711-721.
30.
Marques, J.M., Yzerbyt, V.Y., & Leyens, J.P. (1988). The “black sheep effect”: Extremity of judgments towards ingroup members as a function of group identification . European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1-16.
31.
Martell, R.F., Parker, C., Emrich, C.G., & Crawford, M.S. (1998). Sex stereotyping in the executive suite: “Much ado about something.” Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 127-138.
32.
Miller, D.T., & Prentice, D.A. (1996). The construction of social norms and standards. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 799-829). New York: Guilford.
33.
Moskowitz, G.B., & Skurnik, I.W. (1999). Contrast effects as determined by the type of prime: Trait versus exemplar primes initiate processing strategies that differ in how accessible constructs are used. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 911-927.
34.
Mussweiler, T., Gabriel, S., & Bodenhausen, G.V. (2000). Shifting social identities as a strategy for deflecting threatening social comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 398-409.
35.
Powell, G.N., Butterfield, D.A., & Parent, J.D. (2002). Gender and managerial stereotypes: Have the times changed?Journal of Management, 28, 177-193.
36.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271-320.
37.
Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1987). Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 297-340). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
38.
Rosnow, R.L., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). If you're looking at cell means, you're not looking at only the interaction (unless all main effects are zero). Psychological Bulletin,110, 574-576.
39.
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.
40.
Rudman, L.A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157-176.
41.
Rudman, L.A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004-1010.
42.
Rudman, L.A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743-762.
43.
Schein, V.E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women's progress in management. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 675-688.
44.
Sinclair, L., & Kunda, Z. (1999). Reactions to a black professional: Motivated inhibition and activation of conflicting stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 885-904.
45.
Sinclair, L., & Kunda, Z. (2000). Motivated stereotyping of women: She's fine if she praised me but incompetent if she criticized me. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1329-1342.
46.
Snyder, M. (1984). When belief creates reality. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 248-306). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
47.
Stapel, D.A., & Schwinghammer, S.A. (2004). Defensive social comparisons and the constraints of reality. Social Cognition, 22, 147-167.
48.
Taylor, S.E. (1981). A categorization approach to stereotyping. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 145-182). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49.
Tesser, A., & Smith, J. (1980). Some effects of task relevance and friendship on helping: You don't always help the one you like. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 582-590.
