Cited by 206Gender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup PsychologyCareer Development and Diversity

Successful female leaders empower women's behavior in leadership tasks

Open access
Latu, Ioana M., Mast, Marianne Schmid, Lammers, Joris, Bombari, Dario·2013·Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.01.003

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Subtle and implicit exposure to a picture of elite female role models positively influenced women's self-appraisals and behavior during stressful leadership tasks.

    “In recent research, subtle and implicit exposure to a picture of elite female role models positively influenced women's self-appraisals and behavior during stressful leadership tasks (Latu, Schmid Mast, Lammers, & Bombari, 2013).”

    From Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and leadership (2016) · cites this paper as Latu, Schmid Mast, Lammers, & Bombari, 2013

  • Role models can be particularly effective at hindering deleterious stereotype threat effects in the domain of leadership.

    “Role models can be particularly effective at hindering deleterious stereotype threat effects in the domain of leadership.”

    From Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and leadership (2016) · cites this paper as Latu, Schmid Mast, Lammers, & Bombari, 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Latu, I. M., Mast, M. S., Lammers, J., & Bombari, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Neuchâtel (CH)
  • Tilburg University (NL)
Corresponding author
Latu, Ioana M.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
444-448
ISSN
0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2147047468
Cited by
206
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 51 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3
FWCI
29.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
female role models, stereotype threat, women in leadership, empowerment, gender differences in leadership, leadership performance, public speaking, self-assessment, Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel, Bill Clinton, virtual reality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review