The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sex Effects on Evaluation
Abstract
Prejudicial evaluation is often cited as an explanation for the apparent failure of competent women to achieve as much success as men have. In this paper we review research on the evaluation of the qualifications and performance of men and women, and research on attributions about the causes of performance. Although most of the studies reviewed show pro-male evaluation bias, contradictory evidence has also been found. Three factors affecting these research findings are discussed: (1) the level of inference required in the evaluation situation, (2) the effects of sex-rote incongruence, and (3) the effect of level of qualifications and performance involved.
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
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 10,899
Men and Women of the Corporation.
Strauss, G., & Kanter, R. M. (1978) · Industrial and Labor Relations Review · doi:10.2307/2522922 · Cited by 7,288
Men and Women of the Corporation
Devanna, M. A. (1978) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/002188637801400208 · Cited by 6,354
Sex‐Role Stereotypes: A Current Appraisal1
Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1972.tb00018.x · Cited by 1,857
Gergen, K. J. (1973) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0034436 · Cited by 1,845
Status Characteristics and Social Interaction
Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M. (1972) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2093465 · Cited by 1,742
(2017) · The SAGE Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd edition · doi:10.4135/9781483386874.n283 · Cited by 1,412
Deaux, K., & Emswiller, T. (1974) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0035733 · Cited by 715
Perceiving the Causes of Success and Failure: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Attributional Concepts
Schuster, B., Forsterlung, F., & Weiner, B. (1989) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022189202005 · Cited by 649
Are women prejudiced against women?
Goldberg, P. (1968) · Trans-action · doi:10.1007/bf03180445 · Cited by 624
Cited by
Role 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
Heilman, M. E. (2001) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234 · Cited by 2,482
Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks.
Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.416 · Cited by 1,312
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
Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women, and managers.
Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., Martell, R. F., & Simon, M. C. (1989) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037//0021-9010.74.6.935 · Cited by 686
Metadata
- Authors
- Nieva, V. F., & Gutek, B. A.
- Venue
- The Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 1980-04
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 267
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2019528006
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 26.33
- 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: Sex Effects on Evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/257436
- The paper
- Nieva, V. F., & Gutek, B. A. (1980). Sex Effects on Evaluation. The Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.2307/257436
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.
