دانلود رایگان مقاله اثرات مجهز کردن زنانه در ارزیابی صلاحیت کامپیوتری در زنان

Abstract

According to common gender stereotypes, women are assumed to have lower computer skills than men. Following the interactive model of Deaux and Major (1987), target attributes or situational cues can activate stereotypes. Can the outfit of a woman elicit the stereotype of women's lower computer skills? In our study, 162 participants (105 women, 57 men) evaluated the same women competing for an IT-related student job, differing only in their outfit (neutral vs. feminine). Compared to a neutral outfit, a feminine outfit led to higher ratings of femininity, but lower ratings of computer skills, and unfavorable attributions of success and failure in a computer task (higher attribution of success to luck and of failure to lack of skills). Furthermore, women with a feminine outfit were also rated as less intelligent, less competent and less likeable. Similar to previous findings, male participants rated themselves as higher in computer skills than female participants.

4. Discussion

Previous work has shown that women are thought to be less skilled with computers than men (Cooper, 2006; Smith et al., 2005). The goal of this study was to test whether this stereotype could be activated by a stimulus person's attributes (Deaux & Major, 1987). We decided to test this assumption in the area of outfits, because these can be easily changed and results can therefore impact recommendations concerning outfits for job interviews or similar important (professional) situations. We compared the ratings of the same stimulus persons with either a neutral or a feminine outfit allegedly applying for a computer-related student job. In sum, the outfit of the evaluated women played an important role in the judgment of their computer skills. It influenced the ratings of their computer skills, and the attribution of success or failure in solving a computer task. Furthermore, it affected the ascription of general competence and likeability. We first discuss these results, then turn to strengths and limitations of our research, and finally consider the implications.