Abstract

AbstractLetters of recommendation typically use subjective language that is open to interpretation. In three studies, participants “translated” letters of recommendation for female and male applicants written by sexist, anti‐sexist, or “control” professors. Predictions were based on the shifting standards model [Biernat, Manis, & Nelson, 1991], the attributional principle of augmentation [Kelley, 1971, and models of “correction” for contamination [e.g., Wilson & Brekke, 1994]. Participants translated equivalent letters as indicating lesser ability in female than male applicants, particularly when the letter writer was described as sexist, but own impressions of the candidate diverged from those of the sexist writer. Differential standard use and attributional augmentation did not appear to be responsible for these effects. Instead, writer sexism triggered dislike and corrective processes in impression formation. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.