The effect for women in task groups of gender composition (all female; skewed, solo female; and balanced) and type of attributiontal accounts (internal vs. external) are explored in 36 groups with three naive subjects and one confederate. Results show that gender composition affects women's influence and likability more than attributional accounts do. Additionally, getnder composition conditions the impact of attributional accounts so that (a) a solo woman in an otherwise male group is most influential and well liked when she gives external attributional accounts, (b) a woman in an all-female group is most influential and well liked when she gives internal accounts, and (c) a woman in gender-balanced groups is comparably influential and well liked when she gives internal or external accounts. The discussion addresses implications of the findings for women in paid work contexts, particularly in cultures that emphasize independence and individual achievement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acker, J. (1990). Hicrarchies and jobs: Notes for a theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4, 139-158.
2.
Andresani, P. J. , & Nestel, G. (1976). Internal-external control as a contribution to and outcome of work experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 156-165.
3.
Baker, A. J. (1982). The problems of authority in radical movement groups: A case study of a radical lesbian-feminist organization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18, 323-341.
4.
Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
5.
Bradley, G. W. (1978). Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 56-71.
6.
Carlston, D. E. , & Shovar, N. (1983). Effects of performance attributions on others' perceptions of the attributor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 515-525.
7.
Cassell, J. (1989). A group called women: Sisterhood and symbolism in the feminist movement. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
8.
Catalyst . (1984). Campus resource: A guide to exploring career and personal life options (Vol. 1). New York: Catalyst Press.
9.
Cockburn, C. (1985). Machinery of dominance: Women, men, and technology. London: Pluto.
10.
Cohen, E. G. , & Roper, S. S. (1972). Identification of interracial interaction disability: An application of status characteristics theory. American Sociological Review, 37, 476-500.
11.
Crittenden, K. S. (1983). Sociological aspects of attribution. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 425-446.
12.
Crittenden, K. S. (1989). Causal attribution in sociocultural context: Toward a self-presentational theory of attribution processes. Sociological Quarterly, 30, 1-14.
13.
Crittenden, K. S. , & Wiley, M. G. (1985). When egotism is normative: Self presentational norms guiding attributions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 360-365.
14.
Della Fave, L. R. (1986). Toward an explication of the legitimation process. Social Forces, 65, 476-500.
15.
Eskilson, A. , & Wiley, M. G. (1976). Sex composition and leadership in small groups. Sociometry, 39, 183-194.
16.
Forsyth, D. R. (1980). The functions of attributions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 184-189.
17.
Forsyth, D. R. , Berger, R. E., & Mitchell, T. (1981). The effects of self-serving vs. other-serving claims of responsibility on attraction and attribution in groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 59-64.
18.
Frank, H. H. , & Katcher, A. H. (1977). The qualities of leadership: How male medical students evaluate their female colleagues. Human Relations, 30, 403-416.
19.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
20.
Harvey, D. F. , & Brown, D. R. (1982). An experimental approach to organization development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21.
Izraeli, D. (1983). Sex effects or structural effects? An empirical test of Kanter's theory of proportions. Social Forces, 61, 153-165.
22.
Izraeli, D. (1985). The attitudinal effects of gender mix in union committees. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 37, 212-221.
23.
Jellison, J. M. , & Green, J. (1981). A self-presentation approach to the fundamental attribution error: The norm of internality. Journal of Psychology and Social Psychology, 40, 643-649.
24.
Joyce, R. D. (1972). Encounters in organizational behavior: Problem situations. New York: Pergamon.
25.
Kanter, R. M. (1977a). Some effects of proportions in group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 965-990.
26.
Kanter, R. M. (1977b). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
27.
Laws, J. (1979). The second X. Sex role and social role. New York: Elsevier.
28.
Martin, P. Y. (1985). Group sex composition in work organizations: A structural-normative model. Research in the Sociology of Organizatiotns, 4, 311-349.
29.
Martin, P. Y. (in press). Some further thoughts on gender composition in work organizations. In C. Ridgeway (Ed.), Micro-macro linkages in social psychology. New York: Springer-Verlag.
30.
Martin, P. Y. , & Shanahan, K. (1983). Transcending the effects of sex composition in small groups. Social Work with Groups, 6, 19-32.
31.
McLaren, A. (1982). Ambition and accounts: A study of working-class women in adult education. Psychiatry, 45, 235-246.
32.
Molm, L. D. (1986a). Gender and power use: An experimental analysis of behavior and perceptions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 285-300.
33.
Molm, L. D. (1986b). Gender, power, and legitimation: A test of three theories. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 1356-1386.
34.
Piliavin, J. A. , & Martin. R. R.. (1978). The effects of sex composition of groups on style of social interaction. Sex Roles, 4, 81-96.
35.
Reed, B. G. (1981). Gender issues in training group leaders. Journal of Specialists in Grouip Work, 10, 161-170.
36.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1982). Status in groups: The importance of motivation. American Sociological Review, 47, 76-88.
37.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1984). Dominance, performance, and status in groups. In E. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in grouip processes (Vol. 1). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
38.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1987). Nonverbal behavior, dominance, and the basis of status in small groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 683-694.
39.
Ridgeway, C. L. , & Berger, J. (1986). Expectations, legitimation, and dominance in task groups. American Sociological Review, 51, 603-617.
40.
Ridgeway, C. L. , & Diekema, D. (1989). Dominance and collective hierarchy formation in male and female task groups. American Sociological Review, 54, 79-93.
41.
Ridgeway, C. L. , & Jacobson, C. K. (1977). Source of status and influence in all female and mixed sex groups. Sociological Quarterly, 18, 418-425.
42.
Skvoretz, J. (1981). Extending expectations states theory: Comparative status models of participation in N person groups. Social Forces, 59, 752-770.
43.
Smith-Lovin, L. , & Brody, C. (1989). Interruptions in group discussions. American Sociological Review, 54, 424-435.
44.
Smith-Lovin, L. , Skvoretz, J. V., & Hudson, C. G. (1986). Status and participation in six-person groups: A test of Skvoretz's comparative status model. Social Forces, 64, 992-1005.
45.
South, S. J. , Markham, W. T., Bonjean, C. M., & Corder, J. (1987). Sex differences in support for organizational advancement. Work and Occupations, 14, 261-285.
46.
Tetlock, P. E. (1980). Explaining teacher explanations of public performance: A self-presentation interpretation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 283-290.
47.
Tetlock, P. E. (1981). The influence of self-presentational goals on attributional reports. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 300-311.
48.
Thurston, M. A. (1987). Feminist women's health centers in the 1980s. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Florida State University, Tallahassee.
49.
Vecchio, R. P. (1981). Worker's belief in internal versus external determinants of success. Journal of Social Psychology, 114, 199-207.
50.
Wagner, D. G. , Ford, R. S., & Ford, T. W. (1986). Can gender inequalities be reduced?American Sociological Review, 51, 47-61.
51.
West, C. , & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, 125-151.
52.
Williams, C. (1989). Gender differences at work: Women and men in nontraditional occupations. Berkeley: SAGE Publications.
53.
Wolman, C. , & Frank, H. H. (1975). The solo women in a professional peer group. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 41, 164-170.
54.
Zimmer, L. (1988). Tokenism and women in the workplace: The limits of gender-neutral theory. Social Problems, 35, 64-77.
