Multiple Group Membership and Well-Being: Is There Always Strength in Numbers?

This is the final version of the article. Available from Frontiers Media via the DOI in this record.The research materials supporting this publication can be accessed by contacting Dr. Anders Larrabee Sønderlund at [email protected] growing body of research points to the value of multiple group memberships for individual well-being. However, much of this work considers group memberships very broadly and in terms of number alone. We conducted two correlational studies exploring how the relationship between multiple group membership and well-being is shaped by (a) the complexity of those groups within the overall self-concept (i.e., social identity complexity: SIC), and (b) the perceived value and visibility of individual group memberships to others (i.e., stigma). Study 1 (N = 112) found a positive relationship between multiple group membership and well-being, but only for individuals high in SIC. This effect was mediated by perceived identity expression and access to social support. Study 2 (N = 104) also found that multiple group memberships indirectly contributed to well-being via perceived identity expression and social support, as well as identity compatibility and perceived social inclusion. But, in this study the relationship between multiple group memberships and well-being outcomes was moderated by the perceived value and visibility of group memberships to others. Specifically, possessing multiple, devalued and visible group memberships compromised well-being relative to multiple valued group memberships, or devalued group memberships that were invisible. Together, these studies suggest that the benefits of multiple group membership depend on factors beyond their number. Specifically, the features of group memberships, individually and in combination, and the way in which these guide self-expression and social action, determine whether these are a benefit or burden for individual well-being

Sex, Drugs, and Reckless Driving: Are Measures Biased Toward Identifying Risk-Taking in Men?

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this record.We investigated whether risk-taking measures inadvertently focus on behaviors that are more normative for men, resulting in the overestimation of gender differences. Using a popular measure of risk-taking (Domain-Specific Risk-Taking) in Study 1 (N = 99), we found that conventionally used behaviors were more normative for men, while, overall, newly developed behaviors were not. In Studies 2 (N = 114) and 3 (N = 124), we demonstrate that differences in normativity are reflected in gender differences in self-reported risk-taking, which are dependent on the specific items used. Study 3 further demonstrates that conventional, masculine risk behaviors are perceived as more risky than newly generated, more feminine items, even when risks are matched. We conclude that there is confirmation bias in risk-taking measurement.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by an internal competitive grant from the Melbourne Business School, University of Melbourne, awarded to Cordelia Fine, who is also grateful for the support of the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia. This work was also supported by an internal competitive grant from the College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, awarded to Thekla Morgenroth and Michelle Ryan. Michelle Ryan was also supported by a British Academy Mid-Career Fellowshi

Gender inequalities during COVID-19

This is the final version. Available on open access from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this record The onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic put a halt to progress toward gender equality and, instead, exacerbated existing gender inequalities across domains—from gendered divisions of labour to economic stability. In this paper we document some of the most glaring gender inequalities that have arisen in the COVID-19 pandemic and discuss how social psychological theories and research—including work on gender stereotypes and roles, responses to threat, precarious masculinity, perceptions of risk, and backlash—can help to explain the roots of these inequalities. In doing so, we use a broad definition of gender and consider relevant intersections of identity. Finally, we present three key considerations for research on gender inequalities moving forward. Namely, the need for social psychologists to (a) challenge binary conceptualizations of gender, (b) broaden the focus of research on gender inequalities, and (c) adopt an intersectional lens to address systemic inequalities in the wake of COVID-19.European Commissio

Career Barriers and Motivations for Women and Men Working in Disaster Risk Reduction: A Snapshot in the Asia-Pacific Region

This is the final version. Available on open access from the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction via the DOI in this recordThis publication explores enablers and barriers to women’s careers and leadership aspirations in disaster risk reduction (DRR), the ways in which workplace outcomes are different for women and men, the understanding of what predicts these differential outcomes and what opportunities there are to redress them. The results of this research suggest the day-to-day experiences of DRR professionals shape their career motivations and ambition, their well-being and their desire to stay within the profession. While there are many commonalities in women and men’s experiences in DRR, there are also key differences. The report identified barriers to women’s career advancement, well-being and longevity in DRR including but not limited to: women’s lower willingness to sacrifice for their careers (likely influenced by lower expectations that these sacrifices will be rewarded), care demands placed on women with children, organisational constraints on women’s workplace authenticity, lower work-life balance and lower quality professional relationships with co-workers and especially senior colleagues. The study also uncovered barriers to men’s well-being in DRR, particularly in regard to their experiences of bullying, burnout and desire to leave the profession. Importantly, the findings also offer insight into what organisations and the DRR profession more broadly can do to improve women and men’s career outcomes in DRR

Overestimating women’s representation in medicine: a survey of medical professionals’ estimates and their(un)willingness to support gender equality initiatives

This is the final version. Available on open access from BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this recordData availability statement: Data are available in a public, open access repository. All data underlying the findings described in this article are available at the Center for Open Science (https://osf.io/hrm63/).Objective Amidst growing numbers of women in certain areas of medicine (eg, general practice/primary care), yet their continued under-representation in others (eg, surgical specialties), this study examines (1) whether medical professionals mistakenly infer that women are now broadly well represented, overestimating women’s true representation in several different areas and roles; and (2) whether this overestimation of women’s representation predicts decreased support for gender equality initiatives in the field, in conjunction with one’s own gender. Design Cross-sectional survey. Setting UK-based medical field. Participants 425 UK medical consultants/general practitioners and trainees (ST/CT1+/SHO/Registrar); 47% were female. Main outcome measures Estimates of women’s representation in different areas/roles within medicine, examined as a composite estimate and individually; and a multi-item measure of support for gender-based initiatives in medicine. Results Medical professionals tended to overestimate women’s true representation in several different areas of medicine (general practice, medical specialties, surgical specialties) and in various roles (consultants/general practitioners, trainees, medical school graduates). Moreover, these erroneous estimates predicted a decreased willingness to support gender-based initiatives, particularly among men in the field: composite overestimation*respondent gender interaction, B=−0.04, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.01, p=0.01. Specifically, while female respondents’ (over)estimates were unrelated to their level of support (B=0.00, 95% CI −0.02 to 0.02, p=0.92), male respondents’ tendency to overestimate the proportion of women in medicine predicted lower support for gender-based initiatives (B=−0.04, 95% CI −0.06 to −0.02, p<0.001). Conclusions While some progress has been made in gender representation in the medical field, this research illustrates that there are still barriers to gender equality efforts and identifies who within the field is focally maintaining these barriers. It is those individuals (particularly men) who overestimate the true progress that has been made in women’s representation who are at highest risk of undermining it.European Research Council (ERC)Medical Research Council (MRC

Recognizing the diversity in how students define belonging: evidence of differing conceptualizations, including as a function of students’ gender and socioeconomic background

This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this record. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.Sense of belonging is a fundamental human motivation and, in higher education settings, has been associated with students’ motivation and academic outcomes. However, less is known about the nuances of how students define belonging within a university context, and how their gendered and socio-economic identity-based experiences inform these definitions. Using a qualitative approach, we interviewed 36 UK university students to better understand (1) students’ definitions of belonging to university, and (2) how these conceptualizations are shaped by their experiences in terms of their gender, their socioeconomic status, and the intersection of these two identities. Interviews showed that students defined belonging in terms of social belonging. These definitions were shaped by their (a) cultural capital about university, (b) socioeconomic or gender identity experiences and (c) perceived similarity with other students. Indeed, despite the fact that students’ definitions of belonging were associated with how they have experienced belonging to university, identity-based experiences were mostly mentioned when they perceived they did not belong, which was framed as a “sense of anti-belonging”. Otherwise, students defined belonging as (a) being authentic, considering—for example—gender identity-based experiences of acceptance in university, or (b) sharing similar experiences with others, considering the importance of perceiving similarity with other students to feel they belong and, in some cases, being necessary to learn about university culture to perceive similarity with others. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed in terms of how belonging conceptualisations are bound up in identity and context, opening questions about the consequences of inclusion and diversity policies in higher education.European Union Horizon 2020National Agency for Research and Development (ANID

Support (and rejection) of meritocracy as a self‐enhancement identity strategy: A qualitative study of university students’ perceptions about meritocracy in higher education

This is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author [DPF].Access to Higher Education (HE) is based on the idea that all students should have the same opportunities, and that merit and hard work, regardless of students’ backgrounds, will lead to success. However, inequalities remain despite efforts to provide equal access to HE, raising questions about the validity of such a meritocratic approach. Using qualitative analysis, we interviewed UK university students to understand students’ perceptions of meritocracy in HE, and if and how students associated these perceptions with their gender and subjective socioeconomic status identity experiences. Students’ perceptions could be described in two main ideas: (a) the perceived commitment of their universities to meritocracy, and (b) their endorsement and rejection of meritocracy as an identity enhancement strategy. Hence, both support and lack of support for meritocracy are strategies used by disadvantaged groups to navigate and cope with the lack of opportunities and socioeconomic disadvantages in HE.European Union's Horizon 2020National Agency for Research and Development (ANID

Think Manager – Think Parent? Investigating the fatherhood advantage and the motherhood penalty using the Think Manager – Think Male paradigm

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this recordMen remain overrepresented in leadership positions, due in part to a think manager – think male (TMTM) association (Schein, 1973) whereby stereotypes of men are more similar to stereotypes of manager than are stereotypes of women. Building on research into the motherhood penalty and fatherhood advantage, we extend Schein’s TMTM paradigm to investigate whether parenthood exacerbates the phenomenon. In Study 1 (N = 326), we find clear support for a fatherhood advantage, such that fathers are described as more similar to managers compared to either men in general, women in general, or to mothers. We did not find evidence for a motherhood penalty. Indeed, mothers, compared to women in general, were seen as more similar to managers (a motherhood advantage within women), while relative to fathers, mothers were seen as less similar to managers, thus, a gender penalty remained within parenthood. We replicate these findings in a pre-registered Study 2 (N = 561), and further show that patterns are similar for ideal managers (prescriptive manager stereotypes, Study 1) and leaders more generally (Study 2). Taken together, the results suggest that gender and managerial stereotypes do not reveal a simple fatherhood advantage and motherhood penalty. Rather, stereotypes of parenthood may provide benefits for both mothers and fathers – suggestive of a parenthood advantage, at least in terms of stereotype content.European Commissio

A leadership looking glass: How reflected appraisals of leadership shape individuals’ own perceived prototypicality and group identification

This is the final version. Available on open access from Routledge via the DOI in this recordData availability: Data reported in this article are available upon request from the corresponding author.Research on social identity and leadership rarely examines leadership processes from the perspective of leaders themselves. Three studies (experimental, longitudinal, cross-sectional) help fill this gap. Integrating social identity principles with a reflected appraisals perspective, we demonstrate that as individuals come to see themselves as (informal) leaders in a group, it positively affects their own sense of fit to the group prototype. Their own perceived prototypicality, in turn, yields a strengthened attachment to the group (identification). Importantly, we demonstrate this in racial and ethnic minority groups – an understudied context, yet where individuals develop meaningful conceptions of leadership and identification, with implications for their health and commitment to collective action. Altogether, this provides insights on social identity processes, and minority group leadership.University of California, Los AngelesEuropean Research Council (ERC

Reflecting on the use of Google Docs for online interviews: Innovation in qualitative data collection

This is the final version. Available on open access from SAGE Publications via the DOI in this recordGoogle Docs is a widely used online word processing software. Despite its broad popularity in business and education, Google Docs is under-utilised as a tool to facilitate qualitative interviews within research. In this article, we reflect on our experiences as two PhDs using Google Docs to conduct synchronous, online, written interviews. We present two case studies, which, to our knowledge, are the first to utilise Google Docs to conduct web-based written interviews. In doing so, we (a) outline the development and implementation of the methodology, (b) highlight the key themes we identified when considering the benefits and challenges of conducting interviews using this technology and (c) discuss possible future uses of the methodology. We argue that synchronous web-based written interviews via Google Docs offer unprecedented opportunities for qualitative research.European Research Council (ERC