The Intersection of Gender and Race in the Labor Market

Browne, Irene; Misra, Joya

doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100016

Cited by 736 publications

(620 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

565

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[29][30][31][32] The current study was conducted to test race by gender differences in implicit bias against Blacks. Similar to the literature on the intersection of race and gender on explicit bias, 40,44 and in line with the subordinate male target hypothesis, 40 the highest level of implicit bias was expected in White men.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Interaction Between Race and Gender and Effect on Implicit Racial Bias Against Blacks

Assari

2018

Int J Epidemiol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims: Exposure and vulnerability to racial discrimination is not solely a function of race but the intersection of race and gender, with Black men experiencing more discrimination than Black women. This phenomenon is explained by the subordinate male target hypothesis, suggesting that majority men specifically target men of color. If that is the case, implicit bias would be most common among the majority men. The current cross-sectional study investigated race by gender differences in implicit bias against Blacks. Methods: Data came from Harvard University's Project Implicit, an online survey, conducted during 2006-2016. Data included 444 422 implicit association tests (IATs) which were taken by Blacks (n=56 384) and Whites (n=388 038). Using IAT, the dependent variable was implicit bias against Blacks. Independent variables were race, gender, and age. Using SPSS, linear regressions were utilized to test the additive and multiplicative effects of race and gender on implicit bias against Blacks. Results: Race (b = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.38-0.39) and gender (b = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.05-0.05) were associated with IAT score suggesting higher implicit bias against Blacks among Whites and men. A significant interaction was found between race and gender (b = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.04-0.07), suggesting the highest level of implicit bias against Blacks among White men. Conclusion: It is not solely race and gender but their intersection that shapes social distribution of implicit bias against Blacks. This finding extends the previous literature showing that not solely race or gender but their intersection influences exposure to discrimination.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Interaction Between Race and Gender and Effect on Implicit Racial Bias Against Blacks

Assari

2018

Int J Epidemiol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…. ) in uences (Browne and Misra 2003). Instead, they seek evidence to demonstrate that race and gender intersect in the labor market.…”

Section: Traditional Notions: Ethnic Segregation and Gender Segregationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…King argues for the intersection of 15 Nevertheless, we should recall that our measurements are rooted in quantitative, hypothesis-testing research. Consequently, we do not and cannot say anything about the painful, subjective experiences that ensue from the double burden of racism and sexism that minority women experience in their everyday lives (Browne and Misra 2003;McCall 2005). ethnicity and gender in the manner to which we alluded in the literature review section:…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All writers on this topic have concluded that gender is a greater source of occupational segregation than ethnicity (see, inter alia, Albelda 1986;Blackwell 2003;King 1995;Mintz and Krymkowski 2011;Reskin and Cassirer 1996;Tomaskovic-Devey 1993;Wright and Ellis 2000). However, one of the tenets of the so-called theories of intersectionality, the idea that these two exemplars of ascribed status intertwine in producing inequality (Browne and Misra 2003;King 1988;McCall 2001), has received much less attention in applied research. We translate this interest to the study of occupations by asking the following question: do the segregative e ects of ethnicity and gender interact in the ways proposed by intersectional theories?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The joint effect of ethnicity and gender on occupational segregation. An approach based on the Mutual Information Index

Guinea-Martín

Mora

Ruiz‐Castillo

2015

Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article studies the effects of gender and ethnicity on occupational segregation. The traditional approach to this topic measures the two sources of segregation separately. In contrast, we measure the joint effect of gender and ethnicity by applying a multigroup segregation index-the Mutual Information or M index-to the product of the two genders and seven ethnic groups distinguished in our census data for England and Wales in 2001. We exploit M's strong group decomposability property to consistently pose the following two questions: (i) How much does each source contribute to occupational segregation, controlling for the effect of the other? (ii) Is the combined impact of gender and ethnicity greater than, equal to, or smaller than the sum of their individual effects? The main empirical findings are the following two. First, we confirm previous results showing the greater importance of gender over ethnicity as a source of occupational segregation. However, we find that ethnicity contributes 13.5 percent of overall segregation in geographical areas where minorities concentrate. Second, contrary to intersectionality theories, we find that there is a small, "dwindling" interaction effect between the two sources of segregation: ethnicity slightly weakens the segregative power of gender, and vice versa.

show abstract

“…Additionally, and not surprisingly, socioeconomic status, gender, and racioethnicity often interact (e.g., Browne & Misra, 2003;Solari, 2006;Duffy, 2007). For instance, Thiel (2007) discusses how notions of (white) working-class masculinity helped normalize the physical taint of British construction jobs; Mendez (1998) As alluded to above regarding Thompson's (2010) study of Latino lettuce pickers, the danger of having particular categories of socioeconomic status, gender, and racioethnicity cluster in low-prestige dirty work is that the clustering may come to seem normal and expected to insiders and outsiders alike.…”

Section: A Self-fulfilling Prophecymentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextualizing dirty work: The neglected role of cultural, historical, and demographic context

Ashforth

Kreiner

2014

Journal of Management & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although perceptions of physically, socially, and morally stigmatized occupations – ‘dirty work’ – are socially constructed, very little attention has been paid to how the context shapes those constructions. We explore the impact of historical trends (when), macro and micro cultures (where), and demographic characteristics (who) on the social construction of dirty work. Historically, the rise of hygiene, along with economic and technological development, resulted in greater societal distancing from dirty work, while the rise of liberalism has resulted in greater social acceptance of some morally stigmatized occupations. Culturally, masculinity tends to be preferred over femininity as an ideological discourse for dirty work, unless the occupation is female-dominated; members of collectivist cultures are generally better able than members of individualist cultures to combat the collective-level threat that stigma inherently represents; and members of high power-distance cultures tend to view dirty work more negatively than members of low power-distance cultures. Demographically, marginalized work tends to devolve to marginalized socioeconomic, gender, and racioethnic categories, creating a pernicious and entrapping recursive loop between ‘dirty work’ and being labeled as ‘dirty people.’

show abstract

The Intersection of Gender and Race in the Labor Market

Cited by 736 publications

References 65 publications

Interaction Between Race and Gender and Effect on Implicit Racial Bias Against Blacks

Interaction Between Race and Gender and Effect on Implicit Racial Bias Against Blacks

The joint effect of ethnicity and gender on occupational segregation. An approach based on the Mutual Information Index

Contextualizing dirty work: The neglected role of cultural, historical, and demographic context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About