The Role of Gender in Subjective Performance Evaluations

• In Event: 308 - Section on Sociology of Sex and Gender Refereed Roundtable Session and Business Meeting
  In Refereed Roundtable 60min: Table 04. Gender, Sexuality, and Identity: Session II

Abstract

As women increase participation in traditionally male occupations, gender stereotypes and bias continue to create challenges in advancement to higher levels of leadership. Biased performance evaluations provide negative feedback to women that may hinder career aspirations and retention as well as limit their ability to promote in the organization. Role congruity theory (Eagly & Karau, 2002) posits that women will be evaluated less positively than men in masculine roles such as managerial and organizational leadership. Using a peer performance evaluation system database at the U.S. Naval Academy, we analyze a semester cross-section of subjective peer evaluation attributes assigned to all students across all four class years (N=4441). Results show that for the majority of attributes (64 of 89) there is no gender difference, regardless of whether the characteristic is stereotypically gendered. However, where there is a gender difference, those terms are highly gendered. For those attributes with gender difference, women received more negative attributes and men received more positive attributes. Finally, there are fewer gender differences in attribute application for seniors than freshman (especially related to competence) suggesting that women may have convinced their peers that they were competent to do the job. While subjective performance evaluations may allow for more gender bias, as men and women continue working together they may begin to change stereotypical perceptions based on counter-stereotypical performance and for the military women in this research, increase trust and confidence in their talent and competence as leaders.

Authors

• David Smith, U.S. Naval Academy

• Judith E. Rosenstein, United States Naval Academy