Stereotypes of males and females in two occupations

Suchner, Robert W.; More, Douglas M.

doi:10.1016/0001-8791(75)90015-9

Cited by 19 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the social norms around rationality may contribute to the perceived prestige of engineering, they can also function to minoritize those who belong to groups not recognized as rational (e.g., women) (Faulkner, 2007) or individuals who seek professional development beyond technical skills (Stevens et al, 2005). The presence of social norms in engineering that prioritize rationalistic approaches is also likely related to the fact that rationality is highly correlated with perceptions of occupational prestige (Suchner & More, 1975); others have demonstrated that students believe engineering is superior to all other majors (Stevens et al, 2007). Ultimately, we think our finding supports the claim that efforts to change human behavior (e.g., getting engineers to more fully integrate empathic approaches in their design decisions) requires change in the social norms surrounding that behavior (Cialdini et al, 1990;Paluck & Shepherd, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Dringenberg

Guanes

Leonard

2021

Studies in Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Engineers need to be able to make robust design decisions. Because design is an ill-structured endeavor, design decisions require some combination of rationalistic, intuitive, and empathic approaches. However, engineering education remains largely oriented towards the use of rationalistic approaches. Purpose/Hypothesis: We posit that the persistent gap between the need to leverage diverse approaches to make engineering design decisions and the emphasis on primarily rationalistic approaches in engineering spaces is due, in part, to the beliefs that individuals hold about diverse approaches. Design/Method: We analyzed interview transcripts to identify the beliefs shared by students and by faculty (as individual units of analysis) about rationalistic, intuitive, and empathic approaches to making engineering design decisions, and then we compared the shared beliefs of the two groups. Results: Students and faculty similarly shared a belief that rationalistic approaches are normative in engineering. The two groups also had a common, general belief that empathic approaches are missing in engineering, but they differed in the ways in which they talked about empathic approaches. Finally, the two groups differed in their beliefs about the role of diverse approaches in practice: students believed rationalistic approaches are and should be used most in practice, but faculty believed that rationalistic approaches are inherently limited and therefore require the use of intuitive approaches. Conclusions: We interpret the pervasive belief that engineers are expected to portray their design decision making as primarily rational as a reflection of an unrealistic yet powerful social norm in engineering spaces, which can be understood as a key part of how the exclusive culture of engineering is perpetuated. We see a need to teach explicitly about this social norm in order to disrupt it, and we encourage engineering educators to reflect on how the ways in which their praxis might endorse or reinforce such unrealistic beliefs, either explicitly or implicitly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Dringenberg

Guanes

Leonard

2021

Studies in Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In providing career counseling to special populations, one major concern is with the debilitating effects of occupational stereotypes. Sex-role stereotyping of occupations has already been demonstrated in many empirical studies (Gettys & Cann, 1981;Schlossberg & Goodman, 1972;Shinnar, 1975;Suehner & Moore, 1975;Tibbetts, 1975). For example, Paneck, Rush, and Greenawalt (1977) demonstrated gender-role stereotyping in college students' ratings of 14 out of 25 occupations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 81%

Occupational Stereotyping of Asian Americans

Leong

Hayes

1990

The Career Development Quart

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the presence of occupational stereotypes in the ratings by 194 White college students of 16 occupations identified in the literature as representative of Asian‐White group differences. Three dimensions of stereotypes were measured (probability of success, qualifications for training, and acceptance by others). Questionnaires were varied by race (Oriental versus White) and gender (male versus female). Significant race and gender differences were noted on two dimensions (qualifications for training and probability of success). Both positive and negative stereotypes were found across race and gender groupings. Asians were rated as less likely to succeed as insurance salespersons but more likely to succeed as engineers, computer scientists, and mathematicians. Women were viewed as less qualified to seek training as engineers, police officers, and economists but more qualified to seek training as secretaries.

show abstract

“…Mischel (1974), for example, found that high school and college students evaluated the same article more positively when it was attributed to an author in a sex-appropriate (traditional) rather than a sex-inappropriate (nontraditional) field. Suchner and Moore (1975) found that female students rated women who were employed in traditionally male occupations of varying prestige levels as less likable than men employed in the same occupations. Male undergraduate business students indicated that females would be less capable of filling "demanding" managerial positions than men even if they had the same professional qualifications (Rosen & Jerdee, 1954).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Perceptions of a sex-fair counselor and her client.

Helms¹

1979

Journal of Counseling Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A counseling analogue was constructed to investigate the effects of sex-fair counseling on female and male subjects' perceptions of (a) a female counselor, (b) a same-sex client, and (c) their own attitudes. The experimental design was a 2 X 2 factorial in which a female or a male client discussed traditional or nontraditional career plans with the counselor. The only significant findings regarding perceptions of the counselor were that women anticipated that they would feel more comfortable with the counselor who facilitated nontraditional career exploration than did men. Women tended to evaluate traditional and nontraditional clients similarly, whereas men evaluated the traditional client more favorably regarding academic achievement. Subjects' own attitudes regarding occupational choice did not differ significantly between the two types of counseling, although the nontraditional condition did seem to result in greater flexibility among women.

show abstract

Stereotypes of males and females in two occupations

Cited by 19 publications

References 17 publications

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Student and Faculty Beliefs about Diverse Approaches to Engineering Design Decisions

Occupational Stereotyping of Asian Americans

Perceptions of a sex-fair counselor and her client.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About