Helping or hurting? Effects of sexism and likeability on third party perceptions of women

Abstract

Hostile and benevolent sexism continue to have adverse impacts on opportunities for advancement of women in organizations. In this study we examined the relationship between observer assessments and male interviewer sexism, emphasizing sexism's impact on perceptions of female candidates' hireability and competence. The sample included 266 male and female participants randomized as observers across interview scenarios. Scenario conditions varied between hostile, benevolent, and neutral interviewers, but the female candidate remained neutral. We found that benevolent sexism implies a positive outcome of enhanced observer perception of hireability with little stigma associated with the female candidate's competence, whereas hostile sexism had an overall negative effect, which was offset by observer impressions of likeability of the female job candidate who maintained a neutral composure. Our study findings suggest that observers' perceptions of sexism, benevolence, and a woman candidate's likeability differ and may change with experience. Perception of likeability, in particular, may provide a positive relational strategy for mitigating the effect of benevolent sexism without the tradeoff of perceived diminished competence.