Journal of Personality and Social Psychology © 2011 American Psychological Association 2011, Vol. 101, No. 1, 109–128 0022-3514/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0022530 Evidence That Gendered Wording in Job Advertisements Exists and Sustains Gender Inequality Danielle Gaucher and Justin Friesen Aaron C. Kay University of Waterloo Duke University Social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) contends that institutional-level mechanisms exist that reinforce and perpetuate existing group-based inequalities, but very few such mechanisms have been empirically demonstrated. We propose that gendered wording (i.e., masculine- and feminine-themed words, such as those associated with gender stereotypes) may be a heretofore unacknowledged, institutional-level mechanism of inequality maintenance. Employing both archival and experimental analyses, the present research demonstrates that gendered wording commonly employed in job recruit- broadly. ment materials can maintain gender inequality in traditionally male-dominated occupations. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated the existence of subtle but systematic wording differences within a randomly sampled set publishers. of job advertisements. Results indicated that job advertisements for male-dominated areas employed greater masculine wording (i.e., words associated with male stereotypes, such as leader, competitive, allied dominant) than advertisements within female-dominated areas. No difference in the presence of feminine disseminated its wording (i.e., words associated with female stereotypes, such as support, understand, interpersonal) be of to emerged across male- and female-dominated areas. Next, the consequences of highly masculine wording one were tested across 3 experimental studies. When job advertisements were constructed to include more not or is masculine than feminine wording, participants perceived more men within these occupations (Study 3), and importantly, women found these jobs less appealing (Studies 4 and 5). Results confirmed that and perceptions of belongingness (but not perceived skills) mediated the effect of gendered wording on job user appeal (Study 5). The function of gendered wording in maintaining traditional gender divisions, Association implications for gender parity, and theoretical models of inequality are discussed. Keywords: inequality, intergroup relations, gender inequality, social dominance, belongingness individual the Psychological of use Despite widely touted egalitarian ideals, women in North Amer- (U.S. Department of Labor, 2007). Why do women continue to be ica continue to be underrepresented in many areas of employment underrepresented in these areas? American including high levels of business, the natural sciences, and engi- Individual-level factors that serve to keep women out of male- personal the neering. In Canada, for example, less than 20% of engineering dominated areas are well documented. Such factors manifest the by undergraduates and only 9% of registered professional engineers within individuals in the form of beliefs, attitudes, and other for are women (Engineers Canada, 2010). A similar picture emerges motivated tendencies. For example, system justification research in the United States. Women comprise only 2.4% of Fortune 500 solely (see Jost & Banaji, 1994; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004) has dem- copyrighted chief executive officers (Catalyst, 2008a), 20% of full professors onstrated that injunctification—people’s tendency to defend the is in the natural sciences (Catalyst, 2008b), and 11% of engineers status quo via construing whatever currently is as natural and intended desirable, and the way that things ought to be (Kay, Gaucher, et al., is 2009; Kay & Zanna, 2009)—is an individual-level process that can document This article was published Online First March 7, 2011. account, at least in part, for women’s continued underrepresenta- article Danielle Gaucher and Justin Friesen, Department of Psychology, Uni- This tion in male-dominated areas. Female participants who learned This versity of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; Aaron C. Kay, Depart- about prevailing inequality (i.e., women’s underrepresentation in ment of Psychology and Neuroscience and Fuqua School of Business, the domains of business and politics) subsequently defended this Duke University. This research was prepared with the support of Social Sciences and inequality as desirable and natural, an effect that was most pro- Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) Doctoral Fellowships to nounced when system justification concerns were experimentally Danielle Gaucher and Justin Friesen and research grants to Aaron C. Kay heightened (Kay, Gaucher, et al., 2009). from SSHRC and the Ontario Ministry for Innovation. We thank Fatima Likewise, benevolent sexist beliefs (Glick & Fiske, 1996, Mitchell, Sandra Olheiser, and Gary Waller at Co-operative Education and 2001a, 2001b) and complementary (see Jost & Kay, 2005; Kay et Career Services, University of Waterloo, for their valuable assistance with al., 2007) or compensatory (see Kay, Czaplin´ski, & Jost, 2009; Study 2. Kervyn, Yzerbyt, Judd, & Nunes, 2009; Napier, Thorisdottir, & Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Danielle Jost, 2010) stereotypes are especially well suited to justify gender Gaucher, who is now at the Department of Psychology, Princeton Univer- sity, Princeton, NJ 08540-1010, or Justin Friesen, Department of Psychol- inequalities. Endorsing the warm but incompetent stereotype of ogy, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, housewives justifies women’s domestic role and exclusion from Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada. E-mail: [email protected] or the workplace (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2004; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, [email protected] & Xu, 2002). Similarly, the competent but cold stereotype of 109 110 GAUCHER, FRIESEN, AND KAY working women has been used as justification for keeping women series of job advertisements that were either sex biased (i.e., made out of (male-dominated) management positions (Fiske, Bersoff, explicit reference to men as candidates for traditionally male- Borgida, Deaux, & Heilman, 1991; Phelan, Moss-Racusin, & dominated jobs such as lineman and women as candidates for Rudman, 2008; Rudman, 1998; Rudman & Glick, 1999, 2001). traditionally female jobs such as stewardess), unbiased (i.e., made There is much less psychological research, however, document- reference to both men and women as candidates), or sex reversed ing the institutional-level contributors to gender inequality. (i.e., referred to women as ideal candidates for the typically male- Institutional-level contributors are those that manifest within the dominated jobs and men as ideal candidates for the traditionally social structure itself (e.g., public policy, law). According to social female jobs). The results were clear: Women were more interested dominance theory (SDT; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), these in male-dominated jobs when the advertisements were unbiased, institutional-level mechanisms exist to reinforce and perpetuate making reference to both men and women as candidates, than existing group-based inequality. Such contributors are often— when the advertisements made reference only to men (Bem & though certainly not always—so deeply embedded within the Bem, 1973). Women reported the greatest interest in the male- social structure that they are overlooked by society at large dominated jobs when the advertisements were sex reversed, ex- (Deutsch, 2006). These types of institutional-level factors remain plicitly referring to women as ideal candidates. highly underresearched (Pratto, Sidanius, & Levin, 2006). In a second study, female participants were presented with job broadly. But despite the difficulty of detecting these systematic or insti- advertisements from a U.S. newspaper and asked to rate their tutional factors, their effects on individual-level psychological preference for each job. Half the participants read job advertise- publishers. processes are profound (e.g., increased antiegalitarianism, racism, ments precisely as they appeared in the paper: sex segregated and victim blaming; Haley & Sidanius, 2005). Indeed, as Haley under jobs–male and jobs–female columns. The other half read allied disseminated its and Sidanius (2005, p. 189) wrote: identical advertisements, but this time they were integrated and be of listed alphabetically with no sex labeling. Women preferred male- to Social hierarchies are in large part created, preserved, and recreated one dominated jobs when they were presented in the integrated rather not by social institutions, or organizations. While lone individuals can or than the sex-segregated columns. Notably, this finding emerged is help to strengthen these hierarchies (e.g. by voting in favor of laws despite a disclaimer on both sets of advertisements citing that “job and that disproportionately handicap low-status groups) or to attenuate them (e.g. by voting in favor of laws that instead help to level the seekers should assume that the advertiser will consider applicants user playing field), institutions should be able to impact hierarchies to a far of either sex in compliance with the laws against discrimination” Association greater degree. (Bem & Bem, 1973, p. 15). This type of bias in job advertisements, however, likely no individual In the current research we identify an unacknowledged, institution- longer exists. On the heels of U.S. civil rights legislation (Title VII the level factor that may serve to reinforce women’s underrepresen-