Social identity threat has been proposed as a key contributor to the underrepresentation of women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), but little research has sought to pinpoint naturally occurring contextual predictors of identity threat for women already training or working in STEM. The focus of the present research was to examine how cues to an identity-safe culture predict more or less positive interactions between men and women in STEM in ways that may trigger or minimize women's daily experience of social identity threat. Specifically, we examined the role of inclusive organizational policies and/or greater female representation as 2 identity safety cues. In 2 daily diary studies of working engineers' experiences, and in an experiment with undergraduate engineering students, we tested a model whereby cues to identity safety predict lower social identity threat for women in STEM, as mediated by having (or expecting to have) more positive interactions with male (but not female) colleagues. Results across each study and an internal meta-analysis of overall effects revealed that female engineers' actual and anticipated daily experience of social identity threat was lower in organizations perceived to have more gender-inclusive policies (but was not consistently predicted by gender representation). The link between gender-inclusive policies and lower social identity threat was mediated by women having (or expecting to have) more positive conversations with male (and not female) colleagues, and was only found for women and not men. The implications for reducing social identity threat in naturalistic settings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

The present research examined whether women’s daily experience of social identity threat in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) settings is triggered by a lack of acceptance during workplace conversations with male colleagues that then predicts daily experiences of burnout. To test these hypotheses, participants from two samples ( N = 389) rated their daily interactions with colleagues across 2 weeks. Results revealed that (1) women reported greater daily experiences of social identity threat on days when their work conversations with men cued a lack of acceptance, (2) these daily fluctuations of social identity threat predicted feelings of mental burnout, and (3) these effects were not found among men or for nonwork-relevant conversations. Additional analyses showed that these results were not driven by highly hostile workplace conversations between men and women, nor were they accounted for by individual differences in women’s sensitivity to perceiving gender bias, status differences, or by women being explicitly undermined by colleagues.

Diversity and inclusion are a key goal in 21st century society, but people continue to self‐segregate in occupations, communities, and everyday interactions. Are people's choices to separate by groups into these different spaces truly “free?” In this paper, we review and extend a new framework for understanding how social identities contextually and automatically constrain the choices people make. We consider how situations subtly cue a sense of fit to one's identity, automatically eliciting state authenticity and a desire to return to those settings that afford authenticity and avoid those that do not. Actors and observers alike often explain these behaviors after the fact as freely chosen. We discuss how the SAFE model can clarify and expand what it means to feel a sense of belonging and explain why those who are advantaged in a setting are often less aware of the way in which their identity advantages them. We end by highlighting how environments can be shaped to foster fit and authenticity among members of underrepresented groups as a means to facilitate diversity.

No abstract

No abstract