Cited by 385Gender Diversity and InequalitySocial and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status Dynamics

Can an agentic Black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders

Open access
Livingston, Robert W., Rosette, Ashleigh Shelby, Washington, Ella F.·2012·Psychological Science

Abstract

Prior research has demonstrated that the display of agentic behaviors, such as dominance, can produce backlash against female leaders because of the incongruence between these behaviors and prescribed gender roles. The current study was designed to fill a gap in existing research by investigating whether these well-established findings are moderated by race. Results revealed that dominant Black female leaders did not create the same backlash that dominant White female leaders did. Experimental evidence confirmed that White female (and Black male) leaders were conferred lower status when they expressed dominance rather than communality, whereas Black female (and White male) leaders were not. These findings highlight the importance, and complexity, of considering the intersection of gender and race when examining penalties for and proscriptions against dominant behavior of female leaders.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797611428079

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Research at the intersection of racial and gender identities is in its infancy.

    “Research at the intersection of racial and gender identities is in its infancy (Livingston, Rosette, & Washington, 2012;Rosette & Livingston, 2012), and more work, focusing on a broader array of identities, is warranted.”

    From Managing to clear the air: Stereotype threat, women, and leadership (2016) · cites this paper as Livingston, Rosette, & Washington, 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Livingston, R. W., Rosette, A. S., & Washington, E. F.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2012-03-14
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
354-358
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2123073197
Cited by
385
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 7
FWCI
45.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
agentic behavior, Black women, women in leadership, backlash against women, interpersonal dominance, race, gender roles, status perception, intersectionality, race and gender
MeSH terms
Black or African American, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Leadership, Male, Race Relations, Role, Social Behavior, Social Dominance, Social Perception, Women, White People

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