The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interaction and the Conservation of Gender Inequality: Considering Employment
Abstract
How can we explain the persistence of gender hierarchy over transformations in its socioeconomic base? Part of the answer lies in the mediation of gender inequality by taken-for-granted interactional processes that rewrite inequality into new institutional arrangements. The problems of interacting cause actors to automatically sex-categorize others and, thus, to cue gender stereotypes that have various effects on interactional outcomes, usually by modifying the performance of other, more salient identities. Because changes in the status dimension of gender stereotypes lag behind changes in resource inequalities, interactional status processes can reestablish gender inequalities in new structural forms. Interactional sex categorization also biases the choice of comparison others, causing men and women to judge differently the rewards available to them. Operating in workplace relations, these processes conserve inequality by driving the gender-labeling of jobs, constructing people as gender-interested actors, contributing to employers' discriminatory preferences, and mediating men's and women's perceptions of alternatives and their willingness to settle for given job outcomes.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Valuation is a social process and as such will be influenced by gender status beliefs, which privilege men and 'masculine' attributes and objects over their feminine counterparts (Ridgeway 1997).”
From Gendering Reciprocity: Solving a Puzzle of Nonreciprocation (2013) · cites this paper as Ridgeway 1997
Citations
Cites
Men and Women of the Corporation.
Strauss, G., & Kanter, R. M. (1978) · Industrial and Labor Relations Review · doi:10.2307/2522922 · Cited by 7,292
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory.
Willer, D., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1989) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2073157 · Cited by 7,207
The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time
Brewer, M. B. (1991) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167291175001 · Cited by 5,107
The Economics of Discrimination.
Collard, D. A., & Becker, G. S. (1972) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2230052 · Cited by 3,642
Sex Differences in Social Behavior
Eagly, A. H. (2013) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203781906 · Cited by 3,440
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60317-2 · Cited by 3,367
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991) · Cited by 2,341
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
Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization
(1992) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/0024-6301(92)90251-v · Cited by 1,754
A dual process model of impression formation.
Brewer, M. B. (1988) · Cited by 1,499
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
“For example, Gutek and Morasch (1982) argued that gender roles spill over into the workplace, and Ridgeway (1997) maintained that gender provides an “implicit, background identity” (p. 231) in the workplace.”
BackgroundThe Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences
Lamont, M., & Molnár, V. (2002) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107 · Cited by 5,446
“While Ridgeway (1997) and Tilly (1998) make important strides in specifying the cognitive and social mechanisms involved in gender boundary-work, similar analyses are needed concerning cultural narratives that play a crucial role in the reproduction of gender boundaries [along the lines developed…”
BackgroundMethodAcker, J. R. (2006) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243206289499 · Cited by 3,858
Unpacking the Gender System: A Theoretical Perspective on Gender Beliefs and Social Relations
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243204265269 · Cited by 1,823
Self-citationGender As a Social Structure: Theory Wrestling with Activism
Risman, B. J. (2004) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243204265349 · Cited by 1,451
Metadata
- Authors
- Ridgeway, C. L.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ridgeway, Cecilia L.
- ORCID
- Ridgeway, Cecilia L.
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1997-04
- Volume
- 62
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 218
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091725322
- Cited by
- 939
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 47 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 39
- FWCI
- 28.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Industrial relations › Employment, Labor, and Gender Studies
- Keywords
- gender inequality, gender stereotypes, interaction processes, sex categorization, gender hierarchy, employment, employment discrimination, gender pay gap, job choice
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
