Women select into business school at a lower rate than men and are underrepresented in high-ranking positions in business organizations. We examined gender differences in reactions to ethical compromises as one possible explanation for these disparities. In Study 1, when reading decisions that compromised ethical values for social status and monetary gains, women reported feeling more moral outrage and perceived less business sense in the decisions than men. In Study 2, we established a causal relationship between aversion to ethical compromises and disinterest in business careers by manipulating the presence of ethical compromises in job descriptions. As hypothesized, an interaction between gender and presence of ethical compromises emerged. Only when jobs involved making ethical compromises did women report less interest in the jobs than men. Women’s moral reservations mediated these effects. In Study 3, we found that women implicitly associated business with immorality more than men did.
AnkerR. (1998). Gender and jobs: Sex segregation of occupations in the world. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Organization.
2.
BakijaJ.ColeA.HeimB. T. (2012). Jobs and income growth of top earners and the causes of changing income inequality: Evidence from U.S. tax return data. Unpublished manuscript, Williams College.
3.
BanduraA.BarbaranelliC.CapraraG. V.PastorelliC. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 364–374.
4.
BetzM.O’ConnellL.ShepardJ. M. (1989). Gender differences in proclivity for unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 321–324.
5.
BladerS. L.ChenY. R. (2012). Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 994–1014.
6.
BowieN. E. (1999). Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Chatman. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socialization in public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459–484.
11.
CohenT. R.WolfS. T.PanterA. T.InskoC. A. (2011). Introducing the GASP Scale: A new measure of guilt and shame proneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 947–966.
12.
CottonJ. L.TuttleJ. M. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review with implications for research. Academy of Management Review, 11, 55–70.
13.
DiekmanA. B.BrownE. R.JohnstonA. M.ClarkE. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051–1057.
14.
DiekmanA. B.ClarkE. K.JohnstonA. M.BrownE. R.SteinbergM. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to STEM careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 902–918.
15.
DreberA.JohannessonM. (2008). Gender differences in deception. Economics Letters, 99, 197–199.
16.
EaglyA. H. (1995). The science politics of comparing men and women. American Psychologist, 50, 145–158.
17.
EaglyA. H.KarauS. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
18.
EaglyA. H.SteffenV. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.
19.
FiskeA. P.TetlockP. E. (1997). Taboo trade-offs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice. Political Psychology, 18, 255–297.
20.
FrankeG. R.CrownD. F.SpakeD. F. (1997). Gender differences in ethical perceptions of business practices: A social role theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 920–934.
21.
FriedmanM. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
GilliganC. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
24.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
25.
GreenwaldA. G.PoehlmanT. A.UhlmannE. L.BanajiM. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.
26.
HaidtJ. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
27.
HainesE. L.KrayL. J. (2005). Self-power associations: The possession of power impacts women’s self-concepts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 643–662.
28.
HeilmanM. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.
29.
HydeJ. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.
30.
JackallR. (1988). Moral mazes: The world of corporate managers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
31.
JaffeeS.HydeJ. S. (2000). Gender differences in moral orientation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 703–726.
32.
KantI. (1997). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
33.
KanterR. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
34.
KrayL. J.HaselhuhnM. P. (2012). Male pragmatism in negotiators’ ethical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1124–1131.
35.
LincolnD. J.PressleyM. M.LittleT. (1982). Ethical beliefs and personal values of top executives. Journal of Business Research, 10, 475–487.
36.
LynessK. S.ThompsonD. E. (1997). Climbing the corporate ladder: Do female and male executives follow the same route?Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 86–101.
37.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. In WalshJ. P.BriefA. P. (Eds.), Academy of management annals (Vol. 2, pp. 351–398). New York, NY: Routledge.
38.
MardsenP. V.KallebergA. L.CookC. R. (1993). Gender differences in organizational commitment: Influences of work positions and family roles. Work and Occupations, 20, 368–390.
39.
MartellR. F.LaneD. M.EmrichC. (1996). Male-female differences: A computer simulation. American Psychologist, 51, 157–158.
40.
MartinP. Y.HarrisonD.DinittoD. (1983). Advancement for women in hierarchical organizations: A multilevel analysis of problems and prospects. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 19, 19–33.
41.
MillerJ. G.WheelerK. G. (1992). Unraveling the mysteries of gender differences in intentions to leave the organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 465–478.
OkimotoT. G.BrescollV. L. (2010). The price of power: Power seeking and backlash against female politicians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 923–936.
44.
OrtsE. W.StrudlerA. (2009). Putting a stake in stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 88, 605–615.
45.
PetersenT.MorganL. A. (1995). Separate and unequal: Occupation-establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 329–365.
46.
PrattoF.StallworthL. M.SidaniusJ.SiersB. (1997). The gender gap in occupational role attainment: A social dominance approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 37–53.
47.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
48.
RobinsonR. J.LewickiR. J.DonahueE. M. (2000). Extending and testing a five factor model of ethical and unethical bargaining tactics: Introducing the SINS scale. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 649–664.
49.
RudmanL. A.HeppenJ. B. (2003). Implicit romantic fantasies and women’s interest in personal power: A glass slipper effect?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1357–1370.
50.
RudmanL. A.PhelanJ. E. (2008). Backlash for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations. In StawB. M.BriefA. P. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 61–79). West Yorkshire, England: Emerald.
51.
SpenceJ. T.HelmreichR. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.
52.
SpencerS. J.SteeleC. M.QuinnD. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.
53.
StephensN. M.LevineC. S. (2011). Opting out or denying discrimination? How the framework of free choice in American society influences perceptions of gender inequality. Psychological Science, 22, 1231–1236.
54.
TetlockP. E.KristelO. V.ElsonS. B.GreenM. C.LernerJ. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853–870.
55.
WilliamsB. (1988). Consequentialism and integrity. In SchefflerS. (Ed.), Consequentialism and its critics (pp. 20–50). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
