Constraints, Competencies, or Choices? How Lay Theories of the Gender Gap Impact Diversity Support

Resistance to diversity initiatives can undermine their effectiveness. I advance insight into diversity support by identifying lay theories about why the gender gap persists. I identify three gender gap lay theories, which differ in the implied locus and control women have over the gap. These attributions shape women’s perceived responsibility, which, in turn, undermines diversity initiative support. Attributing the gap to organizational barriers is positively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are external and uncontrollable by women. Attributing the gap to dispositional factors (e.g., traits) is negatively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are internal to women (but not necessarily controllable). Finally, attributing the gap to women’s personal choices is negatively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are both internal to and controllable by women; thus, it is most undermining overall. I test these ideas in five multimethod studies, which generally support my theory. I also find gender gaps are attributed to personal choice more than racial gaps are. Overall, this project suggests that, beyond demographics and ideology, sensemaking about the causes of gender inequality and, in particular, the belief that it is due to personal choice, significantly undermines diversity support.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Academy of Management Journal
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2023.0625
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Gender Diversity and Inequality
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.87
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Constraints, Competencies, or Choices? How Lay Theories of the Gender Gap Impact Diversity Support

Elinor Flynn
1 citations
Academy of Management Journal
Gender Diversity and Inequality
3.87
article

Constraints, Competencies, or Choices? How Lay Theories of the Gender Gap Impact Diversity Support

Elinor Flynn
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Resistance to diversity initiatives can undermine their effectiveness. I advance insight into diversity support by identifying lay theories about why the gender gap persists. I identify three gender gap lay theories, which differ in the implied locus and control women have over the gap. These attributions shape women’s perceived responsibility, which, in turn, undermines diversity initiative support. Attributing the gap to organizational barriers is positively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are external and uncontrollable by women. Attributing the gap to dispositional factors (e.g., traits) is negatively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are internal to women (but not necessarily controllable). Finally, attributing the gap to women’s personal choices is negatively associated with diversity support because it implies the causes are both internal to and controllable by women; thus, it is most undermining overall. I test these ideas in five multimethod studies, which generally support my theory. I also find gender gaps are attributed to personal choice more than racial gaps are. Overall, this project suggests that, beyond demographics and ideology, sensemaking about the causes of gender inequality and, in particular, the belief that it is due to personal choice, significantly undermines diversity support.

Academy of Management JournalVol. 68(6)
London Business School (GB)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Gender Diversity and Inequality
3.87
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.