It was hypothesized that for equally qualified workers, female bookkeepers, as compared to male bookkeepers, would be perceived to have weaker job commitment and would be assigned lower salaries. Using hypothetical case histories of bookkeepers, 79 male and 83 female subjects did assign higher salaries to the men. Unexpectedly, however, they perceived higher commitment by the female bookkeepers. It now appears sex can affect the perceived status importance of the position in much the way a job can define a worker's status. In general, simple length of service appears to be the most critical factor influencing worker's perceived commitment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmorD. J.CouchA. S. (1972) Data-text primer: An introduction to computerized social data analysis. New York: The Free Press.
2.
DipboyeR. L.ArveyR. D.TerpstraD. E. (1977) Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applicants as determinants of resume evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 288–294.
3.
DipboyeR. L.FromkinH. L.WibockK. (1975) Relative importance of applicant sex, attractiveness and scholastic standing in evaluation of job applicant resumes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 39–43.
4.
HamnerW. C.KimJ. S.BairdL.BigonessW. J. (1974) Race and sex as determinants of ratings of potential employers in a simulated work sampling task. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 705–711.
5.
HeilmanM. E. (1983) Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. In CummingsL.StawB. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior. Vol. 5. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp. 269–298.
6.
HrebiniakL. G.AluttoJ. A. (1972) Personal and role related factors in the development of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 555–573.
7.
KochJ. L.SteersR. M. (1978) Job attachment, satisfaction, and turnover among public sector employeesJournal of Vocational Behavior, 12, 119–128.
8.
LewisP. (1986) In wages, sexes may be forever unequal. New York Times, 136, 46, 995 (December, 21), Section 4, 20.
9.
MobleyW. H. (1982) Supervisor and employee race and sex effects on performance appraisals: A field study of adverse impact and generalizability. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 598–606.
10.
O'LearyV. (1974) Some attitudinal barriers to occupational aspirations in women. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 809–826.
11.
PetersL. H.O'connerE. J.WeekleyJ.PooyanA.FrankB.Eren-KrantzB. (1984) Sex bias and managerial evaluations: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 349–352.
12.
RosenB.JerdeeT. H. (1973) The influence of sex-role stereotypes on evaluations of male and female supervisory styles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 44–48.
13.
RosenB.JerdeeT. H. (1974a) Effects of applicantsapos; sex and difficulty of job on evaluations of candidates for managerial positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 511–512.
14.
RosenB.JerdeeT. H. (1974b) The influence of sex-role stereotypes on personnel decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 9–14.
15.
RosenB.MericleM. (1979) Influence of strong versus weak fair employment practices and applicant's sex on selection decisions and salary recommendations in a management simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 435–439.
16.
SteersR. M. (1977) Antecedents and outcomes of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 46–56.
17.
TerborgJ. R.IlgenD. R. (1975) A theoretical approach to sex discrimination in traditionally masculine occupations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 352–376.
18.
ThurowL. C. (1981) Why women are paid less than men. New York Times, 130 (March 8), Section 3, 2.
19.
WexleyK. N.PulakosE. D. (1982) Sex effects on performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads: A field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 433–439.
