No credit where credit is due: attributional rationalization of women's success in male-female teams.
In 3 experimental studies, the authors explored how ambiguity about the source of a successful joint performance outcome promotes attributional rationalization, negatively affecting evaluations of women. Participants read descriptions of a mixed-sex dyad's work and were asked to evaluate its male and female members. Results indicated that unless the ambiguity about individual contribution to the dyad's successful joint outcome was constrained by providing feedback about individual team member performance (Study 1) or by the way in which the task was said to have been structured (Study 2) or unless the negative expectations about women's performance were challenged by clear evidence of prior work competence (Study 3), female members were devalued as compared with their male counterparts-they were rated as being less competent, less influential, and less likely to have played a leadership role in work on the task. Implications of these results, both theoretical and practical, are discussed.
Heilman
Madeline E
ME
Department of Psychology, New York University, NY 10003, USA. madeline.heilman@nyu.edu
Haynes
Michelle C
MC
D000124:Achievement; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001076:Aptitude; D004650:Employee Performance Appraisal; D005246:Feedback; D005260:Female; D005783:Gender Identity; D006126:Group Processes; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011287:Prejudice; D011908:Rationalization; D012054:Reinforcement, Psychology; D013240:Stereotyping