The present studies investigated whether the gender composition of a group represents a sufficient situational cue for creating a mismatch between situationally accessible and ideal self-views. A longitudinal study of 333 employees revealed that being in the numerical minority implied a mismatch with ideal self-views among those who de-emphasized independence in their chronic self-construal, whereas being in the numerical majority constituted a mismatch with ideal self-views among those who emphasized independence. Both types of employees suffered a drop in self-esteem and adopted maladaptive motivational states, namely performance-avoidance goals. The observed deleterious effect of mismatched self-construal on goal pursuit was fully mediated by a perceived lack of acceptance (low social self-esteem). We replicated these findings in a laboratory study with 268 unacquainted individuals who collaborated in small groups on a non-gender-typed group task.
BaranikL. E.StanleyL. J.BynumB. H.LanceC. E. (2010). Examining the construct validity of mastery-avoidance achievement goals: A meta-analysis. Human Performance, 23(3), 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2010.488463
3.
BladerS. L.TylerT. R. (2009). Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013935
BrewerM. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167291175001
6.
BrewerM. B.GardnerW. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self- representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83
7.
BrewerM. B.RoccasS. (2001). Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In SedikidesC.BrewerM. B. (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 219–237). Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
8.
BrocknerJ.LloydK. (1986). Self-esteem and likability: Separating fact from fantasy. Journal of Research in Personality, 20(4), 496–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(86)90128-5
9.
CadinuM.MaassA.RosabiancaA.KiesnerJ. (2005). Why do women underperform under stereotype threat? Evidence for the role of negative thinking. Psychological Science, 16, 572–578. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01577.x
10.
ChurchM. A.ElliotA. J.GableS. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 43–54.https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.43
CrossS. E.VickN. V. (2001). The interdependent self-construal and social support: The case of persistence in engineering. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(7), 820–832. doi: 10.1177/0146167201277005efeef
13.
DarnonC.HarackiewiczJ. M.ButeraF.MugnyG.QuiamzadeA. (2007). Performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals: When uncertainty makes a difference. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin33(6), 813–827. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207301022
14.
ElliotA. J.McGregorH. A. (2001). A 2x2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.501
15.
ElliotA. J.MurayamaK. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.613
16.
ElliotA. J.ReisH. T. (2003). Attachment and exploration in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.317
17.
GaertnerL.SedikidesC.GraetzK. (1999). In search of self-definition: Motivational primacy of the individual self, motivational primacy of the collective self, or contextual primacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.5
18.
GodwinJ. L.NeckC. P.HoughtonJ. D. (1999). The impact of thought self-leadership on individual goal performance: A cognitive perspective. Journal of Management Development, 18, 153–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621719910257738
19.
GöritzA. S. (2014). Determinants of the starting rate and the completion rate in online panel studies. In CallegaroM.BakerR.BethlehemJ.GöritzA. S.KrosnickJ. A.LavrakasP. J. (Eds.), Online panel research: A data quality perspective (pp. 154–170). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118763520.ch7
20.
GöritzA. S.BirnbaumM. H. (2005). Generic HTML form processor: A versatile PHP script to save web-collected data into a MySQL database. Behavior Research Methods, 37(4), 703–710.
21.
GollwitzerM.SchmidthalsK.PoehlmannC. (2006). Relationalitaets-Kontextabhaengigkeits-Skala (RKS): Entwicklung und erste Ansaetze zur Validierung [Relationality-Context Dependency Scale (RKS): Test development and initial validation]. Fachbereich I – Psychologie, Universität Trier.
22.
GreenJ. D.CampbellW. K. (2000). Attachment and exploration in adults: Chronic and contextual accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 452–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200266004
23.
GroverS. S.ItoT. A.ParkB. (2017). The effects of gender composition on women’s experience in math work groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(6), 877–900. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000090
24.
GuillaumeY. R. F.DawsonJ. F.Otaye-EbedeL.WoodsS. A.WestM. A. (2017). Harnessing demographic differences in organizations: What moderates the effects of workplace diversity?Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 276–303. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2040
25.
HannoverB.BirknerN.PohlmannC. (2006). Ideal selves and self-esteem in people with independent or interdependent self-construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(1), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.289
26.
HarwoodC. G.KeeganR. J.SmithJ. M. J.RaineA. S. (2015). A systematic review of the intrapersonal correlates of motivational climate perceptions in sport and physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 18, 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.11.005
27.
HeathertonT. F.PolivyJ. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 895–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895
HeilmanM. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00234
HofhuisJ.Van der ZeeK. I.OttenS. (2012). Social identity patterns in culturally diverse organizations: The role of diversity climate. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(2), 964–989. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00848.x
32.
HoggM. A.Cooper-ShawL.HolzworthD. W. (1993). Group prototypicality and depersonalized attraction in small interactive groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293194010
33.
HoggM. A.TerryD. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. The Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.2307/259266
34.
HoggM. A.TurnerJ. C. (1987). Intergroup behavior, self-stereotyping and the salience of social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26(4), 325–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00795.x
35.
HornseyM. J.JettenJ. (2004). The individual within the group: Balancing the need to belong with the need to be different. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 248–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_2
36.
InzlichtM.Ben-ZeevT. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00272
JoshiA.RohH. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599–627. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.41331491
39.
KellerJ. (2002). Blatant stereotype threat and women’s math performance: Self-handicapping as a strategic means to cope with obtrusive negative performance expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 3–4, 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021003307511
40.
KellerJ.SekaquaptewaD. (2008). Solo status and women’s spatial test performance: The role of individuation tendencies. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(6), 1044–1053. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.490
41.
KiniasZ.SimJ. (2016). Facilitating women’s success in business: Interrupting the process of stereotype threat through affirmation of personal values. Journal of Applied Psychology101(11), 1585–1597. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000139
42.
KochA. J.D’MelloS. D.SackettP. R. (2015). A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 128–161. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036734
43.
KoenigA. M. (2018). Comparing prescriptive and descriptive gender stereotypes about children, adults, and the elderly. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01086
44.
KooleS. L.SmeetsK.van KnippenbergA.DijksterhuisA. (1999). The cessation of rumination through self-affirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.111
45.
KrohneH. W.EgloffB.KohlmannC.-W.TauschA. (1996). Untersuchungen mit einer deutschen Version der “Positive and Negative Affect Schedule” (PANAS). Diagnostica, 42, 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1037/t49650-000
46.
KühnenU.HannoverB.SchubertB. (2001). The semantic-procedural interface model of the self: The role of self-knowledge for context-dependent versus context-independent modes of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.80.3.397
47.
LearyM. R.TamborE. S.TerdalS. K.DownsD. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 518–530. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.3.518
48.
MarkusH.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
49.
MorettiM. M.HigginsT. E. (1990). Relating self-discrepancy to self-esteem: The contribution of discrepancy beyond actual-self ratings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(2), 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(90)90071-S
50.
MowdayR. T.SuttonR. I. (1993). Organizational behavior: Linking individuals and groups to organizational contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 195–229. https://doi.org/10.1146/an-nurev.ps.44.020193.001211
51.
MummendeyA.WenzelM. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(2), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0302_4
52.
MurrayS. L.GriffinD. W.RoseP.BellaviaG. M. (2003). Calibrating the sociometer: The relational contingencies of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 63– 84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.63
NewtonM.DudaJ. L. (1999). The interaction of motivational climate, dispositional goal orientations, and perceived ability in predicting indices of motivation. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 30(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12410
PaulusP. B.van der ZeeK. I. (2015). Creative processes in culturally diverse teams. In OttenS.van der ZeeK. I.BrewerM. B. (Eds.), Towards inclusive organizations: Determinants of successful diversity management at work (pp. 108–131). CRC Press.
58.
PayneS.YoungcourtS.BeaubienJ. (2007). A meta-analytic examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 128–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.128
59.
PearceJ. L.GregersenH. B. (1991). Task interdependence and extra-role behavior: A test of the mediating effects of felt responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 838–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.76.6.838
60.
PerrymanA. A.FernandoG. D.TripathyA. (2016). Do gender differences persist? An examination of gender diversity on firm performance, risk, and executive compensation. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 579–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.05.013
61.
RaoK.TiltC. (2016). Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 138, 327–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2613-5
62.
RiordanC. M.ShoreL. M. (1997). Demographic diversity and employee attitudes: An empirical examination of relational demography within work units. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 342–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.342
63.
Ruiz-JimenezJ. M.Fuentes-FuentesM.Ruiz-ArroyoM. (2016). Knowledge combination capability and innovation: The effects of gender diversity on top management teams in technology-based firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2462-7
64.
SchmaderT.JohnsM. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 440–452. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440
65.
SekaquaptewaD.ThompsonM. (2002). The differential effects of solo status on members of high- and low-status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 694–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202288013
66.
SekaquaptewaD.ThompsonM. (2003). Solo status, stereotype threat, and performance expectancies: Their effects on women’s performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(1), 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00508-5
67.
SingelisT. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205014
68.
SteeleC. M.AronsonJ. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
69.
SteeleC. M.SpencerS. J.AronsonJ. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 379–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0
70.
StephensN. M.FrybergS. A.MarkusH. R.JohnsonC. S.CovarrubiasR. (2012). Unseen disadvantage: How American universities’ focus on independence undermines the academic performance of first-generation college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(6), 1178–1197. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027143
71.
SrivastavaS.BeerJ. S. (2005). How self-evaluations relate to being liked by others: Integrating sociometer and attachment perspectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 966–977. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.966
72.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In WorchelS.AustinL. W. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Nelson-Hall.
73.
van BaarenR.MadduxW. W.ChartrandT. L.de BouterC.van KnippenbergA. (2003). It takes two to mimic: Behavioral consequences of self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 1093–1102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1093
74.
VeldmanJ.MeeussenL.Van LaarC.PhaletK. (2017). Women (do not) belong here: Gender-work identity conflict among female police officers. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 130. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00130
75.
VignolesV. L.ChryssochoouX.BreakwellG. M. (2000). The distinctiveness principle: Identity, meaning, and the bounds of cultural relativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(4), 337–354. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0404_4761–780. doi:10.1002/ejsp.119
76.
VignolesV. L.ChryssochoouX.BreakwellG. M. (2002). Sources of distinctiveness: Position, difference and separateness in the identities of Anglican parish priests. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 761–780. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.119
77.
VignolesV. L.ManziC.RegaliaC.JemmoloS.ScabiniE. (2008). Identity motives underlying desired and feared possible future selves. Journal of Personality, 76, 1165–1200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00518.x
78.
VoyerB. G.BradleyF. (2014). Toward a better understanding of self-construal theory: An agency view of the processes of self-construal. Review of General Psychology, 18(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000003
79.
WatkinsD.ChengC.MpofuE.OlowuS.Singh-SenguptaS.RegmiM. (2003). Gender differences in self-construal: How generalizable are western findings?The Journal of Social Psychology, 143(4), 501–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540309598459
80.
WoikeB. A. (1994). The use of differentiation and integration processes: Empirical studies of “separate” and “connected” ways of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(1), 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.1.142
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
