Search

Stereotypes that women are less assertive and competitive than men lead women to experience stereotype threat in salary negotiations (Tellhed & Bjorklund, 2011), resulting in sex differences in salaries. The present experiment tested whether the effects of stereotype threat on negotiations are moderated by variables that may decrease the salience of sex such as dyad composition (same vs. mixed-sex), mode of communication (face-to-face vs. e-mail), and power. Ninety-six undergraduate participants (37 men, 59 women) negotiated for a hypothetical salary as well as an actual monetary award. As predicted, stereotype threat negatively affected women's outcomes and positively affected men's outcomes in mixed-sex pairs but not in same-sex pairs, Wald Chi-Square = 9.85, p= .002. Interestingly, there were no differences between the face-to-face and e-mail negotiations; both forms of negotiation were affected by stereotype threat in mixed-sex pairs. The basic findings of the present study were consistent with past research; participants assigned to a position of power were more successful in the negotiation regardless of their sex, Wald Chi-Square = 22.74, p < .001, d = 0.49. Limitations, implications, and possible ways to reduce the effects of stereotype threat are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has demonstrated that nonconformist behavior can be primed via visual activation of nonconformist stereotypes. The present experiments were conducted to determine if nonconformity can be primed via aural activation of the punk stereotype. In Study 1, 46 male and 104 female students from McDaniel College were primed with punk, popular, or no music and exposed to social pressure. Not only did participants exposed to punk music fail to exhibit nonconformity, they conformed more than participants who heard popular music and almost as much as those without a prime. As Study 2 determined that members of the population in question did associate the stereotype of nonconformity with punk music, possible alternative explanations and areas for further research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We suggest that single adults in contemporary American society are targets of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, a phenomenon we will call singlism. Singlism is an outgrowth of a largely uncontested set of beliefs, the Ideology of Marriage and Family. Its premises include the assumptions that the sexual partnership is the one truly important peer relationship and that people who have such partnerships are happier and more fulfilled than those who do not. We use published claims about the greater happiness of married people to illustrate how the scientific enterprise seems to be influenced by the ideology. We propose that people who are single-particularly women who have always been single-fare better than the ideology would predict because they do have positive, enduring, and important interpersonal relationships. The persistence of singlism is especially puzzling considering that actual differences based on civil (marital) status seem to be qualified and small, the number of singles is growing, and sensitivity to other varieties of prejudice is acute. By way of explanation, we consider arguments from evolutionary psychology, attachment theory, a social problems perspective, the growth of the cult of the couple, and the appeal of an ideology that offers a simple and compelling worldview. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]