Abstract
Evidence of female-favoring hiring preferences for assistant professorships suggests that universities can implement affirmative action programs successfully. However, research on the role of applicant gender and the actual use of affirmative action policies in hiring processes for high-level professorships remain scarce. A web-based experiment with 481 economic university members assessed whether evaluators perceived a female applicant as less qualified than a male applicant for an associate professorship position when the job advertisement highlighted the university’s commitment to affirmative action (gender-based preferential selection) but not when it solely highlighted its commitment to excellence (non-gender-based selection). Contrary to previous experimental findings that affirmative action would adversely affect female applicants, evaluators perceived the female applicant as more hirable and ranked her first for the job significantly more often than the male candidate. Furthermore, male evaluators had a stronger preference for the female candidate in the gender-based condition than in the non-gender-based condition and a stronger preference for the male candidate in the non-gender-based condition than in the gender-based condition. Overall, the results provide evidence that gender-based preferential selection policies can evoke their intended effect to bring highly qualified women to high-level professorships, especially when being evaluated by non-beneficiaries of these policies, such as men.
Highlights
Over the past decades, gender balance has been widely achieved among PhD graduates (47.9% female) and assistant professors (46.4% female) in the member countries of the European Union (European Commission, 2019)
Previous studies revealed that these policies may successfully attract female job seekers (e.g., Ibanez & Riener, 2018; Nater & Sczesny, 2016), other research revealed negative consequences for female applicants’ job chances when they were associated with affirmative action policies rather than with gender-neutral policies (e.g., Garcia et al, 1981; Heilman & Blader, 2001; Heilman & Welle, 2006)
Given that women’s representation decreases more strongly as they advance in the academic hierarchy (European Commission, 2019), more research is needed on hiring practices for high-level professorships in permanent positions: Even if women have greater access to lower-level positions today, they might still face obstacles when advancing to high-level positions
Summary
Gender balance has been widely achieved among PhD graduates (47.9% female) and assistant professors (46.4% female) in the member countries of the European Union (European Commission, 2019). Western European countries, including DACH countries, are culturally similar to the United States (Bosak & Sczesny, 2011), women’s underrepresentation in higher levels of professorship in the European countries is even more evident than in the United States and might reflect prevailing discriminatory hiring practices (e.g., Catalyst, 2017) To address these issues, the current study seeks to contribute to the literature on gender and academic careers by examining the role of applicant gender and affirmative action policies in selection processes for high-level professorships. The study assesses whether affirmative hiring preferences rather than hiring biases against female applicants for professorships are pronounced in cultural contexts other than the United States by examining simulated hiring decisions in DACH countries
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
