The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences.
Abstract
In 2 studies that draw from the social role theory of sex differences (A. H. Eagly, W. Wood, & A. B. Diekman, 2000), the authors investigated differences in agentic and communal characteristics in letters of recommendation for men and women for academic positions and whether such differences influenced selection decisions in academia. The results supported the hypotheses, indicating (a) that women were described as more communal and less agentic than men (Study 1) and (b) that communal characteristics have a negative relationship with hiring decisions in academia that are based on letters of recommendation (Study 2). Such results are particularly important because letters of recommendation continue to be heavily weighted and commonly used selection tools (R. D. Arvey & T. E. Campion, 1982; R. M. Guion, 1998), particularly in academia (E. P. Sheehan, T. M. McDevitt, & H. C. Ross, 1998).
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
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.83 · Cited by 9,406
Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach
Steiger, J. H. (1990) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4 · Cited by 7,408 · cited 1×
“It is suggested that good fit indices for CFI and IFI are greater than .90 and that a good fit index for RMSEA is less than .08 (Byrne, 2001; Steiger, 1990; Vandenberg & Lance, 2000).”
BackgroundRole congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.
Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.109.3.573 · Cited by 7,300
Equivalence of the Mediation, Confounding and Suppression Effect
MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1023/a:1026595011371 · Cited by 4,188
The Social Psychology of Stigma
Major, B., & O'Brien, L. T. (2005) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137 · Cited by 3,114
Heilman, M. E. (2001) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234 · Cited by 2,482
Linguistic styles: language use as an individual difference
Pennebaker, J. W., & King, L. A. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1296 · Cited by 1,961
Why are women penalized for success at male tasks?: the implied communality deficit
Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.81 · Cited by 999
Male-female differences: A computer simulation.
Martell, R. F., Lane, D. M., & Emrich, C. (1996) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.51.2.157 · Cited by 421
Cited by
Women in Economics: Stalled Progress
Lundberg, S., & Stearns, J. (2019) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.33.1.3 · Cited by 322
Computing Education Research Today
Fincher, S. A., Tenenberg, J., Dorn, B., Hundhausen, C., McCartney, R., & Murphy, L. (2019) · The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research · doi:10.1017/9781108654555.003 · Cited by 7
White Men Lead, Black Women Help? Benchmarking and Mitigating Language Agency Social Biases in LLMs
Wan, Y., & Chang, K.-W. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.10508 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Psychology
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1591-1599
- ISSN
- 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1854
- OpenAlex
- W2102614574
- Cited by
- 554
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 31.03
- 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: Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0016539
- The paper
- Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016539
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.
