The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Race, Gender, and Workplace Power
Abstract
Survey data support hypotheses regarding differential access to workplace power among women and minorities relative to white men. Specific findings indicate that, relative to white men, all groups encounter increasing inequality at higher levels of power, but only black women seem to experience this form of inequality as a result of direct discrimination. Further analysis indicates that network assistance is more a response to this form of discrimination than an indirect cause. Finally, analysis shows that most groups attain power through homosocial reproduction, but what differs is the opportunity to engage in such reproduction, wherein white men excel. These findings imply that while women and minorities face lower odds than white men of achieving higher levels of workplace power, the reasons for this disadvantage vary among respective groups and thus will likely require different remedies.
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
Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., Ovadia, S., & Vanneman, R. (2001) · Social Forces · doi:10.1353/sof.2001.0091 · Cited by 894 · cited 2×
“On this subject, studies by Cotter et al. (2001) and Morgan (1998) are instructive, albeit indirect.”
Background
Cited by
Engendering Change: Organizational Dynamics and Workplace Gender Desegregation, 1975–2005
Huffman, M. L., Cohen, P. N., & Pearlman, J. (2010) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.2010.55.2.255 · Cited by 210
Babic, A., & Hansez, I. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.618250 · Cited by 184
Bringing Managers Back In: Managerial Influences on Workplace Inequality
Castilla, E. J. (2011) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122411420814 · Cited by 160
Black Under-representation in Management across U.S. Labor Markets
Cohen, P. N., & Huffman, M. L. (2007) · The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · doi:10.1177/0002716206296734 · Cited by 72
How Unbecoming of You: Gender Biases in Perceptions of Ridesharing Performance
Greenwood, B., Adjerid, I., & Angst, C. (2019) · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.24251/hicss.2019.789 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Elliott, J. R., & Smith, R. A.
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 365-386
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-8271
- OpenAlex
- W2107820467
- Cited by
- 408
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 18.66
- 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: Race, Gender, and Workplace Power. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/000312240406900303
- The paper
- Elliott, J. R., & Smith, R. A. (2004). Race, Gender, and Workplace Power. American Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900303
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.