Sex Discrimination in Simulated Employment Contexts: A Meta-analytic Investigation

By H. K. Davison, Michael J. Burke. 2000

419 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c5f4e5e07d046d1ecdb27f0265f056c51b0489ab

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

1. Sabine Sczesny
2. A. Eagly
3. L. Horvath
4. J. Bosak
5. M. Heilman
6. Amanda Diekman
7. S. Murphy
8. Douglas J. Brown

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Sabine Sczesny
2. A. Eagly
3. M. Heilman
4. L. Horvath
5. Amanda Diekman
6. J. Bosak
7. S. Murphy
8. E. King

Citations in the corpus

• Gender Bias in Leader Selection? Evidence from a Hiring Simulation Study (2011, methodology): “Most studies on gender stereotypes in personnel selection processes focus on the influence of gender stereotypes in hiring decisions (see Davison and Burke 2000; Olian et al. 1988).”
• Will Artificial Intelligence Take Over Humanresources Recruitment And Selection (2019, background): “…internet sources and e-recruitment where the variation in the candidate’s accessibility skills is significantly declining (Bartram, 2001;Lee, 2005 Davison and Burke (2000) reviewed 49 studies on gender bias and concluded that during the hiring process recruiters tended to bias against female…”
• Reducing women’s lack of fit with leadership positions? Effects of the wording of job advertisements (2015, methodology): “Such paradigms are regarded as a reasonable and valid method and are common practice (see the meta-analyses of Davison & Burke, 2000; Olian, Schwab, & Haberfeld, 1988; Swim, Borgida, Maruyama, & Myers, 1989).”
• The Matilda Effect in Science Communication (2013, background): “In conceptual terms, drawing on research on genderbased discrimination in general employment contexts (e.g., Davison & Burke, 2000; Roth, Purvis, & Bobko, 2012) would help advance this line of research.”
• Female first, leader second? Gender bias in the encoding of leadership behavior (2006, background): “…position is deWned to be clearly masculine (Eagly & Johnson, 1990; Eagly & Karau, 1991; Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995; Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992), and that females are preferred less by decision makers for male sex-typed positions (e.g., leadership roles; Davison & Burke, 2000).”
• Female Leadership Advantage and Disadvantage: Resolving the Contradictions (2007, background): “Davison and Burke (2000) conducted the most recent review of these experiments, integrating the findings of 49 reports.”
• Teacher Expectations and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Knowns and Unknowns, Resolved and Unresolved Controversies (2005, background): “…with meta-analyses showing that biasing effects of stereotypes on person perception judgments tend to be quite small, typically averaging to an r of about .1 (Davison & Burke, 2000; Kunda & Thagard, 1996; Mazella & Feingold, 1994; Sweeney & Haney, 1992; Swim, Borgida, Maruyama, & Myers, 1989).”
• Women “Take Care,” Men “Take Charge”: Managers' Stereotypic Perceptions of Women and Men Leaders (2009, background): “Previous studies (e.g., Boldry et al., 2001; Davison & Burke, 2000; Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992; Sczesny, 2003) have repeatedly documented evidence of generalized, global perceptions of difference between women and men leaders.”
• The prediction of task and contextual performance by political skill: A meta-analysis and moderator test☆ (2011, background): “(2005) or Ferris et al. (1999) measure of political skill.”
• Social Media in Employee-Selection-Related Decisions (2016, background): “A meta-analysis of experimental research found that individuating information explained approximately 8 times more variance in hiring recommendations than did gender (Olian, Schwab, & Haberfield, 1988; see also Davison & Burke, 2000, and Locksley, Borgida, Brekke, & Hepburn, 1980).”
• Stereotypes, Bias, and Personnel Decisions: Strange and Stranger (2008, background): “As an example, Eagly and Koenig (2008) cite a meta-analysis of Davison and Burke (2000) to support their opinion that ‘‘Available research.substantiates the conclusion that women are discriminated against when they vie for positions that are incongruent with the female gender role’’ (p. 72). But the”