The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers.
Abstract
Using archival organizational data, the authors examined relationships of gender and type of position (i.e., line or staff) to performance evaluations of 448 upper-level managers, and relationships of performance evaluations to promotions during the subsequent 2 years. Consistent with the idea that there is a greater perceived lack of fit between stereotypical attributes of women and requirements of line jobs than staff jobs, women in line jobs received lower performance ratings than women in staff jobs or men in either line or staff jobs. Moreover, promoted women had received higher performance ratings than promoted men and performance ratings were more strongly related to promotions for women than men, suggesting that women were held to stricter standards for promotion.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.110.3.403 · Cited by 3,006
Heilman, M. E. (2001) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234 · Cited by 2,482
Self-citationDouble Standards in the Evaluation of Men and Women
Foschi, M. (1996) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2787021 · Cited by 420
Cited by
Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research
Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Holcombe Ehrhart, K., & Singh, G. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310385943 · Cited by 2,135
Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms
Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0023557 · Cited by 1,748
The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance.
Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.392 · Cited by 1,224
Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences.
Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0016539 · Cited by 554
The White standard: racial bias in leader categorization
Rosette, A. S., Leonardelli, G. J., & Phillips, K. W. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.4.758 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 777-785
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2138993224
- Cited by
- 703
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 49.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.777
- The paper
- Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.777
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.