Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29 (2005), 389395. Blackwell Publishing. Printed in the USA.

Copyright 
C 2005 Division 35, American Psychological Association. 0361-6843/05

EVALUATIONS OF SEXY WOMEN IN LOW- AND


HIGH-STATUS JOBS

Peter Glick, Sadie Larsen, Cathryn Johnson, and Heather Branstiter


Lawrence University

We hypothesized that women who dress in a sexy versus business-like manner evoke negative emotions and perceptions
of lesser competence if employed in high- (but not low-) status jobs. Male and female undergraduates evaluated a
videotaped female target whose physical attractiveness was held constant, but who was (a) dressed in sexy or business-
like attire and (b) allegedly either a manager or a receptionist. Participants exhibited more negative affect toward the
sexily attired manager and rated her as less competent than the neutrally attired manager. This effect was fully mediated
by emotional reactions. In contrast, the appearance manipulation had no effect on emotions toward or competence
ratings of the receptionist. These findings suggest that a sexy self-presentation harms women in high-, but not low-,
status jobs.

Although women have entered the paid workforce in in- competence (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002). Warmth
creasing numbers in the past few decades, they remain un- matches the domestic role, but not high-status work roles.
derrepresented in high-status roles, in part because of the For example, Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick (2004) found that in-
continuing application of stereotypes that assign women formation that evoked a traditional subtypehearing that
traits that do not match the attributes associated with man- a woman had recently become a motherreduced the per-
agerial jobs (Heilman, 1983). Research on sex stereotypes, ceived competence of a female manager, whereas the news
however, suggests that women are not all stereotyped alike. that a male manager had just become a father did not have
Rather, women are typically categorized into specific sub- this effect.
types that cohere into three primary clusters: traditional Many studies have investigated the effects of physical
(e.g., homemaker), nontraditional (e.g., career woman), and attractiveness on the evaluation of male and female work-
sexy (Ashmore, DelBoca, & Titus, 1984; Deaux, Winton, ers (see meta-analysis by Hosoda, Stone-Romero, & Coats,
Crowley, & Lewis, 1985; Six & Eckes, 1991). These sub- 2003), but these studies have not focused on manipula-
types are characterized in contrasting ways that may have tions of the sexiness of a workers self-presentation. It is
important implications for womens perceived fit for occu- important to distinguish between sexualizing ones appear-
pational roles. In particular, we focus on how women who ance and physical attractiveness for several reasons. First,
emphasize sexiness are evaluated within high-status work although physical attractiveness can affect the evaluation
roles. of both men and women in the workplace (Hosoda et al.,
The career woman subtype reflects societal recognition 2003), the relative uniformity of mens clothing and groom-
of the influx of women into the workforce over the past ing options at work (especially for managers) means that the
decades (see Diekman & Eagly, 2000). Thus, the attributes sexualization of appearance is less likely to be relevant to
stereotypically associated with the career woman subtype perceptions of male managers. Mens business attire is rel-
match the traditionally masculine, instrumental traits asso- atively uniform (there is no male equivalent of the low-cut
ciated with high-status work roles (e.g., managerial jobs). In blouse or slit skirt), whereas working women have consider-
contrast, traits associated with the traditional subtype (most ably greater latitude in their attire, makeup, and hairstyles.
prominently, homemaker) emphasize warmth rather than Second, significantly altering ones physical attractiveness is
difficult, but women can easily emphasize or deemphasize
their sexuality through clothing and demeanor. Manipula-
Peter Glick, Sadie Larsen, Cathryn Johnson, and Heather tions of sexiness of self-presentation (as compared to phys-
Branstiter, Department of Psychology, Lawrence University. ical attractiveness) may have a larger impact on perceivers
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Peter Glick, precisely because such self-presentations are chosen and
Department of Psychology, Lawrence University, P.O. Box 599, therefore may be seen as reflecting a womans underlying
Appleton, WI 54912-0599. E-mail: glickp@lawrence.edu personality and values.

389
390 GLICK ET AL.

Furthermore, the effects of physical attractiveness and of in which women are expected to cater to men (e.g., flight
emphasizing ones sexuality on perceptions of female work- attendants, restaurant servers, receptionists), for which sex-
ers may differ. Physical attractiveness has generally been iness may be part of the image associated with the job (see
shown to be beneficial for both female and male workers, Gutek & Cohen, 1987).
leading to more favorable evaluations (Hosoda et al., 2003) Another factor that may harm evaluations of female man-
and greater occupational success (Frieze, Olson, & Russell, agers who are perceived in terms of the sexy subtype is the
1991). These effects are consistent with meta-analyses association of sexy women with feminine traits rather than
(Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991; Langlois et al., with the masculine traits associated with managerial jobs.
2000) that show a consistent bias in favor of physically at- This association may be one area of overlap with the effects
tractive men and women. Being physically attractive, how- of womens physical attractiveness, which also tends to lead
ever, may not automatically cause a woman to be perceived perceivers to infer that a woman has more stereotypically
primarily in terms of her sexuality. For instance, Rudman feminine traits. Indeed, some studies have suggested that
and Borgida (1995) found that the same attractive female physical attractiveness can harm evaluations of female (but
confederates were treated very differently by male partic- not male) managers (Heilman & Saruwatari, 1979; Heilman
ipants who interviewed them for a research assistant job & Stopek, 1985a, 1985b) because they are viewed as more
depending on whether the men were first primed to view feminine and, therefore, less well matched to a role that is
women sexually. Men who were primed to view women in associated with stereotypically masculine traits. These stud-
sexual terms (by viewing television commercials, ostensi- ies, however, are in the minority; meta-analytic work shows
bly as part of a marketing study, that featured sexy women) that most studies (including those that assess profession-
rated the female job applicant as less competent than men als in actual business settings) suggest that physical attrac-
who watched neutral television commercials before the tiveness benefits female as well as male managers (Hosoda
interview. et al., 2003).
The typical manipulation of physical attractiveness in In distinction to the generally favorable effects of over-
most studies is based on a head and shoulders photograph, all physical attractiveness for female workers, we expect
omitting such variations as what the target might be wear- that evoking a sexy woman subtype will harm evaluations
ing (e.g., a low-cut blouse vs. business suit). Such head- of female managers. Specifically, because the sexy woman
shot manipulations may tend to activate the benefits of subtype is associated not only with more feminine traits,
physical attractiveness (evoking the generally more favor- but also, unlike physical attractiveness, with less likeli-
able perceptions that attractive people are accorded) with- hood of possessing competence-related traits required for
out strongly activating classification of physically attractive traditionally masculine jobs (Deaux et al., 1985), we hy-
women into a sexy woman subtype. In the current study, pothesized that a female manager who emphasizes her
we sought to manipulate classification of a woman into the sexuality would be seen as a poor fit for her job, gener-
sexy subtype while keeping her overall physical attractive- ating negative emotional reactions and perceptions of in-
ness constant. competence. In contrast, because the sexy woman type
Why might manipulating the sexiness of a womans is viewed as consistent with feminine occupations (Deaux
self-presentation have different effects from physical et al., 1985), we hypothesized that emphasizing sexiness will
attractiveness? While physical attractiveness has been not generate negative emotions toward or harm percep-
shown to generate a broadly favorable impression of both tions of women in a lower-status, traditionally feminine oc-
male and female targets as more competent as well as more cupation (specifically, in this case, receptionist). We tested
sociable (Eagly et al., 1991; Langlois et al., 2000), investiga- these hypotheses by manipulating the sexiness of a female
tions of the traits associated with the sexy woman subtype targets appearance while holding physical attractiveness
suggest a stereotype that is a poor match for high-status constant.
occupations. Deaux et al. (1985) found that, in contrast to
the favorable effects overall attractiveness has on perceived
competence, the sexy woman stereotype is associated with a METHOD
lack of stereotypically masculine, competence-related traits
Participants
and is viewed as a poor fit for traditionally masculine occu-
pations (such as manager). Cluster analyses have repeatedly We recruited 66 (28 male and 38 female) undergradu-
shown that the cognitive distance between the sexy and ca- ates to participate in a study of perceptions of noncolle-
reer woman clusters is about as large as the distance be- giate individuals. Participants were predominantly Cau-
tween homemaker and career woman, the type of woman casian, middle- to upper-class college students, between
who is viewed as more suited for high-status jobs (Ashmore the ages of 18 and 24 years old. The study was run in
et al., 1984; Six & Eckes, 1991). In contrast, the sexy woman small group sessions with participants randomly assigned
subtype is viewed as compatible with lower-status, stereo- to view a videotape of a business woman in a 2 (sexy vs.
typically feminine occupations (Deaux et al., 1985). This neutral) 2 (receptionist vs. manager) between-subjects
finding may be particularly true for service-oriented jobs design.
Sexy Women in Low- and High-Status Jobs 391

Measures include typing letters, contacting clients, answering phones,


and setting up business appointments or a senior manager
Participants indicated their overall judgments, emotional
for an advertising firm in Chicago [whose] duties include
reactions, and trait perceptions of the videotaped target on
heading client meetings, supervising a department of thirty
dependent measures using a 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely)
people, overseeing projects, and evaluating employee per-
scale. Specifically, participants rated the degree to which
formance. In both cases the description concluded by stat-
they would feel positive emotions (relaxation, happiness, ad-
ing, She is 28 years old, and she has been working for this
miration, contentment, comfortableness, supportiveness,
firm for 7 years. She is content with her career choice and
respect, and fondness; = .90) and negative emotions (irri-
has no intentions of leaving the firm.
tation, frustration, disgust, shame, and humiliation; = .79)
toward the target if she were a coworker. Next, participants
rated the target on traits related to competence (capable, Appearance manipulation. Participants were ran-
efficient, intelligent, skillful, responsible, and two reverse- domly assigned to view a video in which the target wore
coded items, inept and irresponsible; = .86). The emotion makeup and dressed in a manner intended to emphasize her
and trait ratings on competence were based on scales used sex appeal versus a neutral condition that did not emphasize
in prior research (Fiske et al., 2002). her sexuality. For the neutral condition, the woman wore
Additionally, two items specifically designed for this little makeup, black slacks, a turtleneck, a business jacket,
study assessed more objective benchmarks of the targets and flat shoes. In the sexy condition, the same woman wore
intelligence: the targets estimated college GPA (on a 5- more makeup and her hair was tousled. She wore a tight,
category response scale ranging from 2.0 to 4.0 in .5 in- knee-length skirt, a low-cut shirt with a cardigan over it, and
crements) and the estimated selectivity of the college she high-heeled shoes.
attended using a 1 (not at all selective) to 5 (extremely se- Other than the appearance manipulation, the content of
lective) scale. By referring to more concrete benchmarks the videos was identical, with the woman describing her
(e.g., GPA), we reasoned that these items would be less general background, life in college, and hobbies. The script
subject to shifting standards (Biernat & Manis, 1994) than was designed to include ambiguous details that allowed for
the trait ratings (e.g., what is considered highly competent different types of stereotypical judgments to be made, with
for a receptionist may be different from what is considered details that corresponded to both of the relevant female
highly competent for a manager). These two items formed subtypessexy women and career women. For instance,
a reliable scale, = .71. the woman stated that in her free time she liked to go
After completing the dependent measures, participants either to the salon to get her nails done (consistent with
completed several checks on the appearance manipulation. a sexy woman stereotype) or to her favorite bookstore to
Participants rated the targets appearance on a 1 (not at check out the newest books (consistent with a career woman
all) to 7 (extremely) scale for items designed to assess sexy stereotype).
woman subtyping (revealing, seductive, teasing, and three Once participants completed the questionnaires assess-
reverse-scored items, prudent, modest, conservative; = ing their emotional reactions to the target, their perceptions
.93), attractiveness (cute, attractive; = .83), and appropri- of the targets competence and intelligence, and the checks
ateness (appropriate for the job and a reverse-coded item, on the appearance manipulation, we explained the purpose
not appropriate for the job; = .92). It was our intent to ma- and expected results of the study and thanked them for their
nipulate perceived sexiness rather than attractiveness per time.
se. The ratings of appropriateness of the targets appear-
RESULTS
ance for the job assessed a potential explanatory variable
for negative impressions of the target. To assess how participants reacted to and judged the target,
we analyzed the manipulation checks and dependent vari-
Procedure ables using 2 (career of target) 2 (appearance of target)
analyses of variance (ANOVA).1
Participants were first informed that they would view a
videotape of someone who volunteered to talk about her-
Manipulation Check
self for a study of perceptions of noncollegiate individuals.
Before viewing the videotape, participants were first given Sexy woman subtyping. Was the target who dressed
slips of paper describing the career of the woman shown in provocatively viewed (as intended) as emphasizing her sexi-
the video. ness more so than the conservatively dressed target? There
was a significant main effect for the targets appearance,
Career manipulation. The career manipulation de- with participants rating the sexy target as highly sexy (M =
picted the target as being in either a low-status (recep- 5.53, SD = .87) and the neutral target as low in sexiness
tionist) or a high-status (manager) occupation. The career (M = 2.33, SD = .72), F(1, 62) = 241.82, p < .001. Both
slip stated that the woman in the video was either a re- the career main effect and career by appearance interaction
ceptionist for an advertising firm in Chicago [whose] duties were nonsignificant.
392 GLICK ET AL.

Attractiveness. Our aim had been to manipulate the Positive emotions. The targets appearance had a main
sexiness of the targets self-presentation rather than her at- effect on positive emotion ratings, such that participants re-
tractiveness per se. Attractiveness ratings revealed no sig- sponded more positively to the neutral target (M = 4.74,
nificant main effects or interactions, suggesting that the SD = 1.04) than to the sexy target (M = 4.03, SD = 1.12)
manipulation successfully affected the sexiness of the tar- overall, F(1, 62) = 7.73, p < .01. There was also a marginally
gets self-presentation without affecting perceptions of the significant main effect for career such that the woman was
targets overall physical attractiveness. Overall, the target evaluated more favorably when said to be a receptionist
was rated at about the mid-point of the attractiveness scale (M = 4.63, SD = 1.05) than when said to be a manager
(M = 3.94, SD = 1.56). (M = 4.14, SD = 1.14), F(1, 62) = 3.78, p < .06. However,
both main effects should be interpreted in light of the pre-
dicted career by appearance interaction, F(1, 62) = 7.03,
Appropriateness of appearance for the job. This check p = .01. Comparisons of means (see Table 1) revealed that
on the appearance manipulation revealed that sexy attire the interaction occurred because participants reported feel-
was seen as less appropriate overall for both jobs, as indi- ing equally positively toward the receptionist whether she
cated by an appearance main effect, F(1, 62) = 152.44, p < had a sexy or a neutral appearance. In contrast, participants
.001. Specifically, participants rated sexy dress (M = 2.76, reported feeling less positively toward the manager when
SD = 1.50) as less appropriate than neutral dress (M = 6.34, she had a sexy, as compared to a more neutral, appearance,
SD = .54). Importantly, however, there was no appearance t(26) = 3.86, p < .01.
by job interaction, indicating that while sexy attire was per-
ceived as less appropriate than more conservative dress, it
Negative emotions. For negative emotions, there was
was not seen as especially inappropriate for the managerial
a career main effect, such that participants reported more
as opposed to the receptionist job. Therefore, the perceived
negative emotion toward the manager (M = 2.38, SD =
appropriateness of the targets attire cannot explain any ap-
1.09) than toward the receptionist (M = 1.73, SD = .67),
pearance by job interactions that occurred on ratings of the
F(1, 62) = 10.19, p < .01. There was also an appearance
dependent variables.
main effect, such that participants reported more negative
emotion toward the sexy target (M = 2.35, SD = 1.11) than
Emotional Reactions toward the conservatively dressed target (M = 1.74, SD =
.57), F(1, 62) = 8.74, p < .01. However, both of these ef-
Did participants exhibit less positive and more negative fects must be interpreted in light of the expected career
emotions toward the manager, but not the receptionist, by appearance interaction, F(1, 62) = 3.85, p = .05. Com-
when she dressed in a sexy manner? Means for the anal- parisons of cell means (see Table 1) showed that partici-
yses of positive and negative emotions (presented below) pants expressed the same (relatively low) degree of negative
are in Table 1. emotions toward the receptionist whether she had a sexy
or a more neutral appearance. In contrast, participants ex-
pressed more negative emotions toward the manager when
Table 1 she had a sexy appearance than when she had a more neutral
appearance, t(26) = 2.65, p = .01.
Emotional Reactions to Targets In summary, participants expressed less positive and
Targets Appearance more negative emotions to the sexily dressed target than
the conservatively dressed target when she was said to be a
Targets Career Sexy Neutral manager but not when she was said to be a receptionist.
Positive emotions
Receptionist Trait Ratings
M 4.62 4.65
SD 1.06 1.06 Did participants view the managerial, but not the recep-
Manager tionist, target as less competent and intelligent when she
M 3.45 4.83 dressed in a sexy versus a more conservative manner? Means
SD 0.85 1.03 for analyses of the competence and intelligence ratings are
Negative emotions presented in Table 2.
Receptionist
M 1.81 1.60 Competence ratings. There was a main effect for ap-
SD 0.74 0.59 pearance such that participants rated the target as more
Manager competent when she dressed more conservatively (M =
M 2.87 1.85 5.29, SD = .85) than when she dressed in a sexy manner
SD 1.19 0.51
(M = 4.46, SD = .95), F(1, 62) = 13.54, p < .01. As ex-
Note. Rating scale ranged from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely). pected, there was also a significant career by appearance
Sexy Women in Low- and High-Status Jobs 393

Table 2 agers competence. A sexy appearance may violate norms


Perceived Competence of Targets of managerial behavior, eliciting negative emotional reac-
tions that, in turn, lead to less favorable competence rat-
Targets Appearance ings. We tested whether emotions mediated competence
Targets Career Sexy Neutral trait ratings using separate analyses for the manager and
receptionist conditions. First, we computed correlations
Competence (trait ratings) between the appearance manipulation (independent vari-
Receptionist able) and competence ratings (the dependent variable) and
M 4.85 5.18 positive and negative emotion ratings (the potential media-
SD 0.79 0.86 tors). A regression analysis, in which both the independent
Manager
variable (appearance manipulation) and mediators (positive
M 4.13 5.42
SD 0.99 0.85
and negative emotion ratings) were entered simultaneously,
was then used to predict the dependent variable (compe-
Intelligence (GPA and selectivity ratings) tence) to see whether the beta-weight for the appearance
Receptionist
manipulation was significant. These analyses are shown in
M 3.39 3.30
SD 0.61 0.55
Figure 1.
Manager As in the earlier analyses, in the receptionist condi-
M 2.91 3.50 tion the appearance manipulation failed to predict emo-
SD 0.74 0.71 tional reactions or perceptions of competence. In contrast,
for the manager condition, the appearance manipulation
Note. The scale for the competence ratings ranged from 1 (not at all) to 7
(extremely); the scale for intelligence ratings ranged from 1 to 5.
strongly predicted both positive and negative emotions,
which, in turn, predicted the managers perceived com-
petence. Importantly, the significant correlation between
interaction, F(1, 62) = 4.77, p < .05. Comparisons of cell the appearance manipulation and perceived competence of
means (see Table 2) revealed that participants rated the re- the manager dropped to nonsignificance when the emotion
ceptionist as equally competent whether she was dressed in ratings were controlled (as indicated by the nonsignificant
a sexy or a neutral manner. In contrast, participants rated beta-weight).2
the manager as less competent when she dressed in a sexy
manner than when she dressed in a conservative manner, Receptionist
t(26) = 3.57, p < .01.
Positive Emotions

Intelligence. Unlike the competence ratings, the per- -.02 .59**


ceived intelligence items (targets estimated GPA and selec-
tivity of her college) referred to more objective benchmarks -.20
Sexy Appearance Competence
that should be less subject to shifting standards (Biernat &
( = -.14, ns)
Manis, 1994). There were no main effects for either the ca-
reer or the appearance manipulation. The predicted career
.16 -.52**
by appearance interaction was significant, F(1, 62) = 4.36,
Negative Emotions
p < .05. Comparisons of cell means (see Table 2) showed
that participants rated the receptionist as equally intelligent
whether she dressed in a sexy or a neutral manner. In con-
trast, participants rated the manager as less intelligent when
she dressed in a sexy manner than when she dressed in a Manager
neutral manner, t(26) = 2.10, p < .05. Positive Emotions
In summary, as with emotion ratings, competence and
-.60** .81**
intelligence ratings were affected by the appearance ma-
nipulation when the participants believed the target was a
manager but not when they believed she was a receptionist. -.57**
Sexy Appearance Competence
Participants viewed the sexy manager as less competent and ( = -.07, ns)
less intelligent than the conservatively dressed manager.
.46* -.47*
Do Emotional Reactions Mediate the Effect of Sexy Negative Emotions
Appearance on Competence Ratings?
Fig. 1. Emotions as mediators of the effects of sexy appearance
Perhaps emotional reactions mediate the negative effects on perceived competence for manager and receptionist. p < .05.
of a sexy appearance on the evaluation of a female man- p < .01.
394 GLICK ET AL.

In summary, the appearance manipulation had no effect sents a natural confounding that occurs in the job market
on either emotional reactions to or the perceived compe- where status and gender-type of jobs are related (Glick,
tence of the target when she was said to be a receptionist. Wilk, & Perreault, 1995), it ought to be possible to manipu-
In contrast, when she was described as a manager, a sexy (as late these factors independently to determine whether it is
compared to neutral) appearance predicted more negative the gender-type or the status of the job (or both) that mod-
emotional reactions that, in turn, fully mediated the lower erates reactions to women who emphasize their sexuality.
ratings of the managers perceived competence. Second, a larger study could examine whether percep-
tions of sexily versus conservatively dressed female workers
significantly differ for male and female participants. Al-
DISCUSSION
though we found no sex of participant effects, the sample
Perceptions of a female manager were strongly influenced size in the current study did not provide sufficient power to
by manipulating the degree to which her clothing and per- test for three-way interactions between sex of participant,
sonal grooming emphasized sexuality. In contrast, this ma- the appearance manipulation, and type of occupation. Past
nipulation had no effect on perceptions of the same female research, however, suggests that both men and women sub-
target when she was said to be a receptionist. More specifi- scribe to similar stereotypes of sexy women (Ashmore et al.,
cally, a female manager whose appearance emphasized her 1984; Six & Eckes, 1991), suggesting that there may not be
sexiness (as compared to when she dressed more conserva- prominent sex differences in how perceivers evaluate the
tively) elicited less positive emotions, more negative emo- fit of sexy women to managerial jobs.
tions, and perceptions of less competence on a subjective Third, future studies ought to include orthogonal ma-
rating scale and less intelligence on an objective scale. In nipulations of both attractiveness and sexiness. In the cur-
short, emphasizing sexiness had severe costs in terms of rent study, we showed the effects of manipulating sexiness
others reactions for a female manager, but not for a female of self-presentation while holding attractiveness constant
receptionist. at a moderate level. It is possible that sexiness of self-
The effects of the sexy appearance manipulation on per- presentation and attractiveness may have interactive effects
ceptions of lower competence and intelligence for the fe- on evaluations of female managers.
male manager were fully mediated by participants more Fourth, the current study used undergraduates rather
negative emotional reactions toward her. This finding is than professionals as participants. Although stereotyping
consistent with the notion that a general lack of perceived effects demonstrated with undergraduate students have a
fit between sexy women and high-status careers generates good track record of generalizing to business professionals
negative emotional reactions that, in turn, lead to less pos- (e.g., stereotypes of physically attractive people have shown
itive evaluations of a sexy womans ability to perform the strong effects both with students and in the real-world out-
role. Although the current study demonstrated mediation comes of business professionals; see Frieze et al., 1991),
by emotions, a limitation of this study is that potential cog- effect sizes can differ. For example, Marlowe, Schneider,
nitive mediators were not assessed. For example, it is possi- and Nelson (1996) found smaller effects for more experi-
ble that one reason for negative reactions to the sexy female enced evaluators, demonstrating the importance of testing
manager was that participants assumed she used her sexual- whether effects generalize.
ity illegitimately to gain her position (e.g., slept her way to If the results of the current study do generalize to the
the top). Future research ought to include this and other workplace, they have important implications for women
potential cognitive mediators. who aspire to or who hold high-status jobs. Both men and
The current research differs from previous studies in that women judged a female manager more harshly when she
we attempted to hold physical attractiveness constant while presented herself in a sexy manner. The unfavorable judg-
manipulating the sexiness of a womans self-presentation ments included more negative emotional reactions that
through her clothes and grooming. Manipulation checks mediated less favorable ratings of her competence. Al-
suggested that this aim was achievedin the sexy condi- though various media directed toward women (e.g., popular
tion, the participants viewed the female target as present- womens magazines) encourage women to emphasize their
ing herself in a sexier manner, but not as more physically sex appeal, our results suggest that women in high-status
attractive. Manipulation checks also suggested that the neg- occupations may have to resist this siren call to obtain the
ative effects on perceptions of female managers did not oc- respect of their coworkers.
cur because sexy attire was seen as especially incongruent Initial submission: November 17, 2004
and inappropriate only for a managerial as opposed to a Initial acceptance: March 23, 2005
receptionist jobparticipants viewed sexy attire as equally Final acceptance: June 28, 2005
inappropriate for both jobs, suggesting that such attire is
generally considered unprofessional.
NOTES
The current study has a number of weaknesses that fu-
ture research should address. First, the high-status job was 1. We also performed all of the analyses with sex of participant
more traditionally masculine whereas the low-status job was as an additional factor. Across all of the analyses, sex of partic-
more traditionally feminine. Although this problem repre- ipant did not significantly interact with the other independent
Sexy Women in Low- and High-Status Jobs 395

variables. It should be noted, however, that due to the rela- Glick, P., Wilk, K., & Perreault, M. (1995). Images of occupations:
tively small sample size, there was little power for obtaining Components of gender and status in occupational stereo-
three-way interactions between appearance, career, and sex of types. Sex Roles, 32, 565582.
participant. Gutek, B. A., & Cohen, A. G. (1987). Sex ratios, sex role spillover,
2. A similar set of mediational analyses using perceived intelli- and sex at work: A comparison of mens and womens expe-
gence (targets perceived GPA and selectivity of the college riences. Human Relations, 40, 97115.
she attended) as the dependent variable yielded similar re- Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of
sults, with one exception: only positive emotions significantly fit model. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in
predicted perceived intelligence and mediated the effect of the organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 269298). Greenwich,
appearance manipulation. CT: JAI Press.
Heilman, M. E., & Saruwatari, L. R. (1979). When beauty is
beastly: The effects of appearance and sex on evaluations of
REFERENCES job applicants for managerial and nonmanagerial jobs. Or-
ganizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 360
Ashmore, R. D., DelBoca, F. K., & Titus, D. (1984). Types 372.
of women and men: Yours, mine, and ours. Paper pre- Heilman, M. E., & Stopek, M. H. (1985a). Being attractive, ad-
sented at the American Psychological Association Conven- vantage or disadvantage? Performance-based evaluations
tion, Toronto, Canada. and recommended personnel actions as a function of ap-
Biernat, M., & Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and pearance, sex, and job type. Organizational Behavior and
stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and So- Human Decision Processes, 35, 202215.
cial Psychology, 66, 520. Heilman, M. E., & Stopek, M. H. (1985b). Attractiveness and
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals corporate success: Different causal attributions for males
become mothers, warmth doesnt cut the ice. Journal of and females. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 379
Social Issues, 4, 701718. 388.
Deaux, K., Winton, W., Crowley, M., & Lewis, L. L. (1985). Level Hosoda, M., Stone-Romero, E. F., & Coats, G. (2003). The effects
of categorization and content of gender stereotypes. Social of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: A meta-
Cognition, 3, 145167. analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology, 56,
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic 431462.
constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and fu- Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A.,
ture. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171 Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of
1178. beauty: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Psycholog-
Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. ical Bulletin, 26, 390423.
(1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . .: A meta-analytic Marlowe, C. M., Schneider, S. S., & Nelson, C. E. (1996). Gen-
review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. der and attractiveness biases in hiring decisions: Are more
Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109128. experienced managers less biased? Journal of Applied Psy-
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P. S., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of chology, 81, 1121.
(often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth Rudman, L. A., & Borgida, E. (1995). The afterglow of construct
respectively follow from perceived status and competition. accessibility: The behavioral consequences of priming men
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878902. to view women as sexual objects. Journal of Experimental
Frieze, I. H., Olson, J. E., & Russell, J. (1991). Attractiveness and Social Psychology, 6, 493517.
income for men and women in management. Journal of Six, B., & Eckes, T. (1991). A closer look at the complex structure
Applied Social Psychology, 21, 10391057. of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 24, 5771.

Вам также может понравиться