The Impact Of Benevolent Sexism on Evaluations of Female Leaders

This study investigated the impact of benevolent sexism beliefs on evaluations of female leadership candidates in hiring decisions, as well as the moderating effects of occupational gender composition and the gender of the comparison candidate. While seemingly positive, benevolent sexism subtly reinforces traditional gender roles by portraying women as warm but less competent, particularly in leadership roles where competence is crucial. The data in this study was collected from 146 participants via an online questionnaire using MTurk and snowball sampling. Aligning with previous research on gender bias, results indicated that benevolent sexism negatively impacts perceptions of competence and warmth, especially in male-dominated occupations. Contrary to the anticipated warmth-competence tradeoff, women were viewed as warmer when compared to male leader candidates. Furthermore, benevolent sexism was associated with higher salary recommendations for women, suggesting a nuanced relationship between sexism and compensation decisions. Overall, this study highlights how benevolent sexism subtly impedes women’s career advancement. Although benevolent sexists may offer favorable assessments, such as higher compensation, to prospective female leaders, these gestures may obscure deeper gender biases as they may still uphold traditional gender norms through negative evaluations in other aspects of the selection process. These findings emphasize the responsibility of organizations to avoid equating well-intentioned decisions or isolated positive outcomes with true gender equity, and to take proactive steps toward addressing gender discrimination in leadership.