Literature DB >> 19916666

Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: agentic and communal differences.

Juan M Madera1, Michelle R Hebl, Randi C Martin.   

Abstract

In 2 studies that draw from the social role theory of sex differences (A. H. Eagly, W. Wood, & A. B. Diekman, 2000), the authors investigated differences in agentic and communal characteristics in letters of recommendation for men and women for academic positions and whether such differences influenced selection decisions in academia. The results supported the hypotheses, indicating (a) that women were described as more communal and less agentic than men (Study 1) and (b) that communal characteristics have a negative relationship with hiring decisions in academia that are based on letters of recommendation (Study 2). Such results are particularly important because letters of recommendation continue to be heavily weighted and commonly used selection tools (R. D. Arvey & T. E. Campion, 1982; R. M. Guion, 1998), particularly in academia (E. P. Sheehan, T. M. McDevitt, & H. C. Ross, 1998).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19916666     DOI: 10.1037/a0016539

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Appl Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9010


  48 in total

1.  Do students' and authors' genders affect evaluations? A linguistic analysis of Medical Student Performance Evaluations.

Authors:  Carol Isaac; Jocelyn Chertoff; Barbara Lee; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 6.893

2.  Analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 Application Critiques, Impact, and Criteria Scores: Does the Sex of the Principal Investigator Make a Difference?

Authors:  Anna Kaatz; You-Geon Lee; Aaron Potvien; Wairimu Magua; Amarette Filut; Anupama Bhattacharya; Renee Leatherberry; Xiaojin Zhu; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Stereotyping by omission: eliminate the negative, accentuate the positive.

Authors:  Hilary B Bergsieker; Lisa M Leslie; Vanessa S Constantine; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2012-03-26

4.  A quantitative linguistic analysis of National Institutes of Health R01 application critiques from investigators at one institution.

Authors:  Anna Kaatz; Wairimu Magua; David R Zimmerman; Molly Carnes
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  Gender disparities in colloquium speakers at top universities.

Authors:  Christine L Nittrouer; Michelle R Hebl; Leslie Ashburn-Nardo; Rachel C E Trump-Steele; David M Lane; Virginia Valian
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Opportunities and challenges for women PhD investigators in gastrointestinal research.

Authors:  Kathryn E Hamilton; Marie-Pier Tétreault; P Kay Lund
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 22.682

7.  Affirming independence: Exploring mechanisms underlying a values affirmation intervention for first-generation students.

Authors:  Yoi Tibbetts; Judith M Harackiewicz; Elizabeth A Canning; Jilana S Boston; Stacy J Priniski; Janet S Hyde
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2016-05

8.  The Innuendo Effect: Hearing the Positive but Inferring the Negative.

Authors:  Nicolas Kervyn; Hilary B Bergsieker; Susan T Fiske
Journal:  J Exp Soc Psychol       Date:  2012-01-01

Review 9.  Why is John More Likely to Become Department Chair Than Jennifer?

Authors:  Molly Carnes; Christie M Bartels; Anna Kaatz; Christine Kolehmainen
Journal:  Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc       Date:  2015

10.  Patterns of Feedback on the Bridge to Independence: A Qualitative Thematic Analysis of NIH Mentored Career Development Award Application Critiques.

Authors:  Anna Kaatz; Melissa Dattalo; Caitlin Regner; Amarette Filut; Molly Carnes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 2.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.