Abstract
Gender-biased standards in United Kingdom (UK) workplaces continue to exist. Women experience gender discrimination in judgements of competence, even by other women. Clothing cues can subtly influence professional perceptions of women. The aim of this study was to investigate how minor manipulations to female office clothing affect the judgements of competence of them by other UK females and to examine whether such effects differ with occupational status. One group of female university students (n = 54) and one group of employed females (n = 90), all from London and the East of England, rated images of faceless female targets, on a global competence measure derived from six competence ratings (of intelligence, confidence, trustworthiness, responsibility, authority, and organisation). The dress style was conservative but varied slightly by skirt length and the number of buttons unfastened on a blouse. The female targets were ascribed different occupational roles, varying by status (high – senior manager, or low - receptionist). Participants viewed the images for a maximum of 5 s before rating them. Overall participants rated the senior manager less favourably when her clothing was more provocative, but more favourably when dressed more conservatively (longer skirt, buttoned up blouse). This interaction between clothing and status was not present for the receptionist. Employed participants also rated females lower than did student participants. We conclude that even subtle changes to clothing style can contribute towards negative impressions of the competence of women who hold higher status positions in a UK cultural context.
Highlights
Despite increases in equality in the workplace United Kingdom (UK) females still face genderbased prejudice and are consistently under-represented at boardroom level (Villiers, 2010)
Research with mixed a gender sample of undergraduates from the Netherlands showed female employees face additional barriers to men when competing for leadership roles (Kawakami, Dovidio, & Van Kamp, 2005), were more likely to be judged on appearance by UK female recruitment managers and consultants (Caven, Lawley, & Baker, 2013), were under more pressure from United States (US) and UK interactive service employee managers to manage their appearance as part of their role (Warhurst & Nickson, 2009), and when they did they were often objectified and dehumanised in studies on US female undergraduates (Gurung & Chrouser, 2007) and mixed gender samples of Italian students (Vaes, Paladino, & Puvia, 2011)
We explore these evaluations by measuring a composite competence rating based on a number of variables chosen from previous research on stereotyping, workplace clothing judgements and female objectification which have been derived from studies using mixed gender samples of US undergraduates (Glick, Larsen, Johnson, & Branstiter, 2005; Heflick & Goldenberg, 2009) predominantly mixed gender UK students (Howlett et al, 2013), and US female undergraduate students (Johnson & Gurung, 2011)
Summary
Despite increases in equality in the workplace UK females still face genderbased prejudice and are consistently under-represented at boardroom level (Villiers, 2010). Research with mixed a gender sample of undergraduates from the Netherlands showed female employees face additional barriers to men when competing for leadership roles (Kawakami, Dovidio, & Van Kamp, 2005), were more likely to be judged on appearance by UK female recruitment managers and consultants (Caven, Lawley, & Baker, 2013), were under more pressure from US and UK interactive service employee managers to manage their appearance as part of their role (Warhurst & Nickson, 2009), and when they did they were often objectified and dehumanised in studies on US female undergraduates (Gurung & Chrouser, 2007) and mixed gender samples of Italian students (Vaes, Paladino, & Puvia, 2011) These stereotypical gender-based judgements are seen in mixed gender samples of UK students and employed participants (Howlett, Pine, Orakçıoğlu, & Fletcher, 2013), US financial managers (Marlowe, Schneider, & Nelson, 1996), UK recruitment managers and consultants (Caven et al, 2013), US attorneys (Biernat, Tocci, & Williams, 2012), mixed gender samples of retail marketers and managers, bank managers and vice presidents (Forsythe, 1990). These stereotypical gender-based judgements are seen in mixed gender samples of UK students and employed participants (Howlett, Pine, Orakçıoğlu, & Fletcher, 2013), US financial managers (Marlowe, Schneider, & Nelson, 1996), UK recruitment managers and consultants (Caven et al, 2013), US attorneys (Biernat, Tocci, & Williams, 2012), mixed gender samples of retail marketers and managers, bank managers and vice presidents (Forsythe, 1990). Schein (2001), who proposed the “think manager-think male” view, suggests that the same gender role stereotyping barriers apply in many other industrialised societies including Germany, China, and Japan
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
