Scholars of religion have long known that women are more religious than men, but they disagree about the reasons underlying this difference. Risk preference theory suggests that gender gaps in religiosity are a consequence of men's greater propensity to take risks, and that irreligiosity is analogous to other high-risk behaviors typically associated with young men. Yet, research using risk preference theory has not effectively distinguished those who perceive a risk to irreligiousness from those who do not. In this article, we evaluate risk preference theory. We differentiate those who believe in an afterlife, who perceive a risk to irreligiousness, from nonbelievers who perceive no risk associated with the judgment after death. Using General Social Survey and World Values Survey data, multivariate models test the effects of gender and belief on religiousness. In most religions and nations the gender gap is larger for those who do not believe in an afterlife than for those who do, contradicting the predictions of risk preference theory. The results clearly demonstrate that the risk preference thesis is not a compelling explanation of women's greater average religiosity.

No abstract

While conscious action may produce some inequality, most discrimination occurs through cognitive processes that are automatic and unconscious. I examine the role of two cognitive mechanisms that affect gender inequality in the securities industry: homophily preferences and status expectations. I argue that homophily preferences and status expectations are the general cognitive processes that produce the effects of “tokenism,” which were originally identified by Kanter for female tokens. These processes also lead to differences in the experiences of male and female tokens. I use qualitative data on 76 Wall Street professionals to illustrate how homophily and status processes maintain and reproduce stratification in securities firms. Moreover, the compensation system in this industry, which rewards employees based on performance evaluations, aggravates the effects of these cognitive processes. Strong mentors, the possession of specialized skills, and objective performance indicators seem to mitigate these effects for a minority of women.

No abstract

No abstract