IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04547046.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Promotion focus is valued in men more than in women

Author

Listed:
  • Dinah Gutermuth

    (University of Exeter)

  • Melvyn Hamstra

    (LEM - Lille économie management - UMR 9221 - UA - Université d'Artois - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

In this research, we test the hypothesis that promotion‐focused eagerness does not yield the same evaluative benefits in the workplace for women as it does for men. Regulatory focus theory suggests that promotion‐focused eagerness potentially casts a person in a favorable light in the eyes of superiors. Nevertheless, we propose that promotion‐focused eagerness violates the prescriptive gender‐stereotypical expectations that people have of women. The gender deviance (i.e., not acting in line with gender expectations) that occurs when a woman is promotion‐focused causes this woman to pay a "gender tax" that a promotion‐focused man does not pay. First, we conducted two experiments wherein managers ( N = 127) or students ( N = 236) evaluated qualified fictional job applicants: in both experiments, compared with an identical male applicant, the promotion‐focused female job applicant was valued less, as evidenced by a lower starting salary offer. Second, in a dyadic study ( N = 474 dyads), male employees' promotion focus was positively associated with their manager's evaluations of them, whereas female employees' promotion focus was not. Our results show that promotion‐focused women are not valued as positively as their male counterparts.

Suggested Citation

  • Dinah Gutermuth & Melvyn Hamstra, 2024. "Promotion focus is valued in men more than in women," Post-Print hal-04547046, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04547046
    DOI: 10.1002/job.2781
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04547046. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.