Women Quotas vs. Men Quotas in Academia

Autor(en)

Miriam Zehnter, Erico Kirchler

Abstrakt

In this study, we analyze the free verbal associations to the stimuli women quotas and men quotas of 327 medical students. Women and men quotas are characterized by the same modus operandi (i.e., preferential treatment based on sex/gender). However, women quotas help a low-status group, whereas men quotas help a high-status group. In line with a support paradox, that is, the perception that support for women is less fair and less legitimate than support for men, we expected that students would reject women quotas in academia more vehemently than men quotas. Specifically, we hypothesized that students would have more negative and more emotional associations with women quotas than men quotas. As predicted, students had more negative associations with women quotas than with men quotas. However, students did not have more emotional associations with women quotas than with men quotas. In addition, we explored the semantic content of the free associations to identify specific concerns over each quota. Students perceived women quotas as counterproductive, derogatory, and unfair, whereas they perceived men quotas as beneficial and fair. Concerns over the negative perceptions of quota beneficiaries were associated more frequently with women quotas than men quotas. Potential factors underlying students' perceptions of both quotas are discussed.

Organisation(en)

Institut für Arbeits-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialpsychologie

Journal

Frontiers in Psychology

Band

11

Seiten

700

Anzahl der Seiten

14

ISSN

1664-1078

DOI

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00700

Publikationsdatum

04-2020

Peer-reviewed

Ja

ÖFOS 2012

501029 Wirtschaftspsychologie

Schlagwörter

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Allgemeine Psychologie

Link zum Portal

https://ucrisportal.univie.ac.at/de/publications/e87a2121-cc7e-4d5f-a7ef-43778b70e37d