The competing hypotheses of socialization, structural, and social role theories were used to investigate the possible existence of gender differences in job satisfaction. The hypotheses were tested in a sample of over 13,000 U.S. employees from approximately 130 organizations and divisions across a variety of industries. The organizations were clients of a North American-based management consulting company. T tests and effect sizes were calculated to test for the possible existence of group differences in job satisfaction between women and men in both clerical and managerial positions. The results indicate support for structural theory, some support for social role theory, and a lack of support for socialization theory. An important finding is that U.S. women and men in management apparently did not differ from one another in their sources of satisfaction at work.
The concept of equity sensitivity suggests profound differences in individual notions of fairness, and distinguishes between ‘benevolents’ (givers) and ‘entitleds’ (takers). This study extended existing research by exploring the connections between equity sensitivity and business ethics variables. It unfolded in three phases and utilized samples of employed North American respondents. Entitleds tended to respond in less conventionally ethical ways than benevolents; for example, by being more Machiavellian. A proposed model depicting the relationships among the variables provided a good fit to the data in the first of these samples, and some of the findings were replicated in the second sample. A portrait of benevolence began to emerge that contradicted earlier conceptualizations. Benevolents seemed to hold disparaging views of others who lack strong work ethics, and to regard ethically dubious behaviours in which the employing organization could benefit as relatively acceptable. In a third sample, benevolence was surprisingly associated with right‐wing authoritarianism. Implications for the conceptualization and etiology of benevolence were derived, and the assumption of homogeneity in concepts of what is fair and equitable was further challenged by the results.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.