Honorary Whites? Intersections of Race, Gender, and the Dominance Penalty

• In Event: 029 - Regular Session. Group Processes

Abstract

Research has shown that women face a double bind in positions of leadership; they are expected to display authority in order to appear competent, but are judged as socially deficient if they are perceived to be too dominant. While this dominance penalty has been documented in numerous studies across a variety of contexts, the vast majority of studies have only examined reactions to white women’s leadership displays. Recent research challenges the universality of the dominance penalty, and suggests that race and gender intersect to differentially shape reactions to authoritative behavior. In this study, we use experimental research methods to compare evaluations of hypothetical candidates for a job promotion who are all characterized as extremely accomplished, but who differ on their race (Asian or white), gender (man or woman), and behavioral style (tactful or brutally honest). We find that a white woman who is characterized as brutally honest is evaluated as having worse interpersonal skills than white men, Asian men, and Asian women. Despite the white woman being penalized more with respect to her interpersonal skills, the Asian woman is evaluated as less fit for leadership than her Asian and white counterparts. Our results suggest that in a professional hiring context, Asian women’s non-prototypical race and gender status render them less visible. This may allow them the freedom to behave more agentically without eliciting backlash, but also make them less likely to be promoted to leadership positions.

Authors

• Justine Eatenson Tinkler, University of Georgia

• Jun Zhao, University of Georgia

• Yan Li, Stanford University

• Cecilia L. Ridgeway, Stanford University