RESUMEN

Integrating a social identity approach with Cortina's (2008) theorizing about selective incivility as modern discrimination, we examine how identification-with an organization, with one's gender, and as a feminist-shapes bystanders' interpretations and responses to witnessed incivility (i.e., interpersonal acts of disrespect) and selective incivility (i.e., incivility motivated by targets' social group membership) toward women at work. We propose that bystanders with stronger organizational identification are less likely to perceive incivility toward female colleagues as discrimination and intervene, but female bystanders with stronger gender identification are more likely to do so. Results from two-wave field data in a cross-lagged panel design (Study 1, N = 336) showed that organizational identification negatively predicted observed selective incivility 1 year later but revealed no evidence of an effect of female bystanders' gender identification. We replicated and extended these results with a vignette experiment (Study 2, N = 410) and an experimental recall study (Study 3, N = 504). Findings revealed a "dark side" of organizational identification: strongly identified bystanders were less likely to perceive incivility as discrimination, but there were again no effects of women's gender identification. Study 3 also showed that bystander feminist identification increased intervention via perceived discrimination. These results raise doubts that female bystanders are more sensitive to recognizing other women's mistreatment as discrimination, but more strongly identified feminists (male or female) were more likely to intervene. Although strongly organizationally identified bystanders were more likely to overlook women's mistreatment, they were also more likely to intervene once discrimination was apparent.

RESUMEN

Humor research in organizations focuses on leaders' humor, but we know far less about followers' humor. Here, we review and synthesize the scattered work on this "upward humor," offering a novel framing of it as a strategy for followers to deal with hierarchies. We propose a continuum of upward humor from stabilizing (i.e., a friend who uses upward humor to reinforce hierarchies, make hierarchies more bearable or stable) to destabilizing (i.e., a fiend who uses upward humor to question or reshape existing hierarchies) depending on perceived intent (i.e., from benevolent to malicious, respectively) and outline key factors that shape these interpretations. We close with novel questions and methods for future research such as power plays, multi-modal data, and human-robot interactions.

RESUMEN

Past research shows that decision-makers discriminate against applicants with career breaks. Career breaks are common due to caring responsibilities, especially for working mothers, thereby leaving job seekers with employment gaps on their résumés. In a preregistered audit field experiment in the United Kingdom (n = 9,022), we show that rewriting a résumé so that previously held jobs are listed with the number of years worked (instead of employment dates) increases callbacks from real employers compared to résumés without employment gaps by approximately 8%, and with employment gaps by 15%. A series of lab studies (an online pilot and two preregistered experiments; n = 2,650) shows that this effect holds for both female and male applicants-even when compared to applicants without employment gaps-as well as and for applicants with less and more total job experience. The effect is driven by making the applicant's job experience salient, not as a result of novelty or ease of reading.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The early career phase is a key period of identity maintenance and change. But, it is also ripe with important, attention-grabbing occurrences (i.e., critical events) that may modify these processes, particularly influencing women's leadership pursuit. Because previous research has overlooked if or how such events might alter identifying or if these processes differ for people who identify as men and women, we integrate the identity and critical events literatures to elaborate on how positive and negative critical events may shape men and women's identifying in the work- and non-work domains over time. We propose that critical events' effects on identity salience will occur both within and across domains, but that these effects will be stronger within (vs. across) domains. While both positive and negative events can exert negative effects on subsequent identity salience, we propose that the effects of critical events on identity salience may be stronger for women (vs. men). Finally, we connect work identity salience with subsequent leadership status, including contextual moderators that enhance or undermine these effects (i.e., inclusive organizational climate and mega-threats, respectively). We conclude with theoretical and practical implications of this research, including for workforce efficiency and social sustainability. We also highlight calls for future research stemming from our review [e.g., sustainability critical events and gendered analyses for (more) accurate science] as well as fruitful research areas and innovative practices at the work-non-work interface for professionals on the path to leadership.

RESUMEN

Interpersonal anxiety (i.e., the fear of negative consequences from interacting with someone) may be more prominent in post-#MeToo organizations when interacting with someone of a different gender. Initial exchanges may particularly trigger this anxiety, obfuscating key organizational decisions such as hiring. Given humor's positive, intrapersonal stress-reduction effects, we propose that humor also reduces interpersonal anxiety. In three mixed-methods experiments with hiring managers, we examined the effects of applicant and evaluator gender (i.e., same-/mixed-gender dyad), positive applicant humor (i.e., a pun), and context (i.e., gender salience) in job interviews. Results showed that mixed-gender (vs. same-gender) interactions elicited more interpersonal anxiety, particularly when gender was more salient; mixed-gender interactions also predicted downstream attitudinal outcomes (e.g., social attraction and willingness to hire) and hiring decisions (e.g., selection and rejection) via interpersonal anxiety. Although humor reduced interpersonal anxiety and its consequences for female applicants, the opposite was true for male applicants when gender was salient, because it signaled some of the same expectations that initially triggered the interpersonal anxiety: the potential for harmful sexual behavior. In sum, we integrated diversity and humor theories to examine interpersonal anxiety in same- and mixed-gender interactions and then tested the extent to which humor relieved it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Asunto(s)