Gender Stereotypes Stem From The Distribution Of Women And -Books Pdf

Gender Stereotypes Stem From the Distribution of Women and
18 Feb 2020 | 25 views | 0 downloads | 20 Pages | 1.87 MB

Share Pdf : Gender Stereotypes Stem From The Distribution Of Women And

Download and Preview : Gender Stereotypes Stem From The Distribution Of Women And


Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : Gender Stereotypes Stem From The Distribution Of Women And



Transcription

736 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN, These beliefs concern communal and agentic more easily than do women e g Broverman. personal qualities Perceivers generally assume et al 1972 Spence Helmreich 1978 Taylor. that men are oriented toward agentic goals Fiske Etcoff Ruderman 1978 stem from. and women toward communal goals e g perceivers inferences that a women occupy. Bern 1974 Block 1973 Broverman Vogel lower status positions than men and b the. Broverman Clarkson Rosenkrantz 1972 lower an individual s status relative to other. Spence Helmreich 1978 Following Bak persons the more that individual yields to their. an s 1966 discussion of this distinction influence To extend this analysis to the com. agentic qualities are manifested by self asser munal and agentic aspects of gender stereo. tion self expansion and the urge to master types we hypothesized that people who are. whereas communal qualities are manifested higher in status and authority have been ob. by selflessness concern with others and a de served to behave with less communion self. sire to be at one with others This distinction lessness and concern with others and more. has been accorded considerable importance in agency self assertion and urge to master than. theoretical discussions of gender Bakan 1966 those who have lower status positions There. Parsons 1955 and in the development of fore perceivers observations that women oc. measures of sex typed and androgynous per cupy lower status positions than men may lead. sonalities e g Bern 1974 Spence Helm them to believe that women are more com. reich 1978 Furthermore these beliefs about munal and less agentic than men. gender appear to be cross culturally general By a similar logic the differing distributions. Williams Best 1982 of women and men into the roles of home. To examine why women are perceived as maker and employee may account for the ste. communal and men as agentic we considered reotypic beliefs that women are communal and. two major differences in the distribution of men are agentic Because the labor force par. females and males into social roles The first ticipation rates of women 51 2 and men. of these differences is that women are more 77 2 still differ considerably U S Depart. likely than men to hold positions at low levels ment of Labor 1980 perceivers are likely to. in hierarchies of status and authority and are have observed fewer women than men in em. less likely to hold higher level positions The ployee roles and almost exclusively women in. second difference is that women are more likely the homemaker role The perception of women. than men to be homemakers and are less likely as less agentic and more communal than men. to be employed in the paid work force would follow if employees have been observed. Given the pervasiveness in natural settings to behave more assertively and masterfully. of sex differences in status it seems plausible than homemakers as well as less selflessly and. that gender stereotypes stem from the tendency supportively toward others According to this. of perceivers to observe women in lower status analysis the stereotypic differences between. roles than men Such observations would be women and men should parallel the differences. made in organizational settings in which the that people perceive between homemakers and. positions held by men tend to be higher in employees Some empirical support for this. status and authority than the positions held hypothesis is provided by Clifton McGrath. by women e g Brown 1979 England 1979 and Wick s 1976 finding that the communal. Kanter 1977 Mennerick 1975 Also in attributes ordinarily ascribed to women were. family settings husbands tend to have an over assigned only to housewives and not to four. all power and status advantage over wives other categories of women female athlete ca. Blood Wolfe 1960 Gillespie 1971 Scan reer woman club woman and bunny. zoni 1982 Such differences in the status of The experiments that we have carried out. men s and women s roles may be determining to test these ideas share several features of. factors in beliefs about gender design To minimize demand characteristics. Another reason for examining status dif stemming from subjects knowledge of our hy. ferences is that recent research by Eagly and potheses each subject read a description of. Wood 1982 demonstrated that the stereotypic only one woman or man In addition the as. beliefs that women are more easily influenced pect of social roles presumed to account for. than are men and that men exert influence gender stereotypes hierarchical status or oc. GENDER STEREOTYPES 737, cupation as a homemaker or employee was locations agreed to participate Subjects mean age was. varied a In Experiments 1 and 2 which ex 22 30 years in Experiment 1 and 21 81 years in Experi. amined hierarchical status some stimulus,persons had high status job titles and some. had low status job titles and b in Experiment Procedure. 3 which examined the homemaker employee Each subject read a brief description of an employee. distinction some stimulus persons were e g Phil Moore is about 35 years old and has been. homemakers and others were employees For employed for a number of years by a supermarket He is. one of the managers and rated this stimulus person. other stimulus persons this stereotype relevant The descriptions in Experiment 1 varied according to a. aspect of the social role was omitted a In 2 X 3 X 2 female vs male X high status job title vs low. the status experiments the job title was omit status job title vs no job title X bank vs supermarket. ted and b in the homemaker employee ex setting factorial design The design of Experiment 2 dif. fered with respect to the setting variable which had four. periment designation as a homemaker or em levels because a medical clinic and a university department. ployed person was omitted It was in these of biology were added. experimental conditions in which the role de In the laboratory sessions of Experiment 1 a female. scriptions were omitted that subjects should experimenter administered materials to subjects in groups. have manifested gender stereotyping Accord of about 25 Subjects first indicated their age and sex To. ensure that subjects thought carefully about the stimulus. ing to our analysis perceivers view men and person the experimenter had them spend a moment. women stereotypicaUy in the absence of role thinking about the stimulus person after reading the. information because under such conditions description and then write a few sentences about the per. the attributes ascribed to women and men re son Subjects then responded to the measures described. flect the differing social roles that underlie the At the public campus locations in both experiments. stereotypes In contrast the addition of role an experimenter approached each subject by asking her. descriptions to female and male stimulus per or him to participate in a study on impressions of other. sons prevents gender stereotypic judgments if people After the subject had completed the questionnaire. such descriptions e g job titles provide clear the experimenter asked her or his age and recorded this. information along with the subject s sex,cut information about the aspect of social roles. that ordinarily covaries with sex e g hier Manipulation of Independent Variables. archical status In the presence of such role, information the covariation of sex and role Sex of stimulus person The stimulus persons were.
that is the implicit basis of gender stereotypes either female or male Sex was identified by sex typed. names e g Sue Fisher Phil Moore, is removed and role would determine per Status of job title and setting of jab The stimulus. ceivers beliefs about people s attributes persons had either a high status job title a low status job. Women and men who have the same role title or no job title To provide an internal replication of. would be perceived equivalently the design the stimulus persons were described as employed. by a bank or a supermarket and in Experiment 2 also. by a medical clinic or a university department of biology. Experiments 1 and 2 The high and low status job titles for these settings were. vice president and teller manager and cashier physician. Method and x ray technician and professor and lab technician. respectively, In Experiment 1 276 females and 208 males partici Measuring Instruments1. pated Of these subjects 256 were University of Massa. chusetts psychology students who participated in a lab Beliefs about stereotypic attributes Using 5 point. oratory setting to obtain extra credit course points An scales subjects rated the stimulus persons on 18 attributes. experimenter randomly selected the remaining 228 subjects presented either as personality characteristics Experiment. by choosing on repeated occasions every fourth person 1 or as attributes of on the job behavior Experiment 2. seated in a University of Massachusetts coffee shop In Each on the job rating scale was preceded by a question. Experiment 2 237 females and 243 males participated asking how much of the attribute the stimulus person. One female and one male experimenter each randomly exhibited on the job e g How competitive do you think. selected half of the subjects by choosing every fourth person this person is on the job. seated in a coffee shop or general library at Purdue Uni. versity Especially in Experiment 1 the subjects sampled. from the public campus locations included university staff. as well as students la the experiments reported in this For all experiments measures are listed in the order. article 80 or more of the persons selected from such in which they were administered. 738 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEPHEN, Attributes were selected primarily from the Personal ported here Also analyses including subject. Attributes Questionnaire Spence Helmreich 1978 to sex as an additional variable yielded very few. ensure that they a represented gender stereotypes and. b included both communal and agentic qualities A factor differences between female and male subjects. analysis varimax orthogonal rotation of subjects ratings for any of the experiments in this series 3. was performed for each of the five experiments in this Therefore this variable was also dropped from. series All analyses yielded similar two factor solutions all analyses reported in this article Finally. One factor labeled communal accounted for an average. of 17 4 of the variance in the five experiments and an. because analyses including experimenter fe, other factor labeled agentic accounted for an average of male vs male as an additional factor yielded. 23 9 of the variance Although various other labels have very few effects in Experiment 2 or in Ex. been used by researchers to characterize these dimensions periments 3 and 5 which also used one ex. e g expressiveness vs instrumentality social orientation perimenter of each sex this variable was. vs task orientation and femininity vs masculinity none. provided as close a match to the actual content of the dropped from all reported analyses. factors as did Bakan s 1966 terms communion and,agency Inferred Job Status.
The measure of perceived communion was the mean, of each subject s ratings on the attributes that in the five Salary estimates On subjects estimates of. experiments consistently loaded highly on the communal the stimulus persons salaries the main effects. factor kind helpful understanding warm aware of others. feelings and in all but Experiment 1 which omitted this of sex of stimulus person and status of job. attribute able to devote self to others The measure of title were highly significant for both Experi. perceived agency was the mean of each subject s ratings ments 1 and 2 4 Women were judged to have. on the attributes that consistently loaded highly on the lower salaries than men For Experiment 1. agentic factor active not easily influenced aggressive in Ms 12 154 versus 15 425 respectively. dependent dominant self confident competitive makes. decisions easily never gives up easily and in all but Ex F 244 27 24 p 001 and for Exper. periment 1 which omitted this scale stands up well under iment 2 Ms 19 749 versus 23 535 re. pressure These measures had satisfactory internal con spectively F 449 15 29 p 001 Con. sistency The mean values of coefficient alpha Cronbach sistent with the significant main effects of sta. 1951 in the five experiments were 84 for communion. and 86 for agency The findings of all five experiments. tus for Experiment 1 F 2 244 50 58, are presented in terms of these measures Because few and for Experiment 2 F 2 449 137 28. significant effects were obtained on several rating scales ps 001 persons with high status job titles. not included in these measures these findings will not be were judged to earn considerably more than. reported persons whose job titles were not given who. Inferred job status In the laboratory portion of Ex. periment 1 and in Experiment 2 subjects estimated in. dollars the stimulus person s annual salary In Experiment. 2 for stimulus persons who had no job title subjects also 2. gave their best guess concerning the individual s job Because this rating scale measure proved insensitive. title Coders blind to the experimental conditions divided to differences between conditions it was not included in. the job titles into a a high status category consisting of additional studies and will not be discussed further. jobs that either included an administrative or managerial The absence of Sex of Subject X Sex of Stimulus Person. component or required high level technical skills and b interactions is noteworthy in view of research suggesting. a low status category of other jobs Coders agreed on ap that in group members perceive in groups more favorably. proximately 95 of these relatively objective judgments and less stereotypically and homogeneously than they per. and disagreements were resolved by discussion In the lab ceive out groups e g Brewer 1979 Tajfel 1981 see also. oratory portion of Experiment 1 subjects also rated the Park Rothbart 1982 regarding perceptions of women. status of the stimulus person s job on a 15 point scale and men Perhaps this in group out group bias is a man. ranging from low status to high status 2 ifestation of the self enhancing tendency in person per. ception e g Zuckerman 1979 and occurs when re, spondents rate in group members as they would rate. Results themselves It is likely that in the present experiments. subjects merely retrieved their concepts of various groups. of people e g male bank tellers employed women average. The principal data analyses were Sex of men and did not treat themselves as exemplars of the. Stimulus Person X Status of Job Title X Setting same sex categories. analyses of variance ANOVAS Because no sig Because the variance of subjects salary estimates was. nificant effects occurred in Experiment 1 for extremely heterogeneous with larger means associated with. larger variances analyses were performed on the logarithm. locale in which stimulus materials were ad of the salaries in all experiments in this series There was. ministered coffee shop vs laboratory this no serious heterogeneity on the other dependent variables. variable was dropped from the analyses re in these experiments. GENDER STEREOTYPES 739, in turn were judged to earn more than persons Table 1. with low status job titles For Experiment 1 Mean Ratings of Stereotypic Attributes of Female. Ms 19 236 versus 11 773 p 001 and and Male Employees Who Varied in Status. 11 773 versus 10 120 p 025 for Exper of Job Title Experiment 1. iment 2 Ms 32 057 versus 18 548 p Stimulus High Low No. 001 and 18 548 versus 14 359 p 001 person status status title. The Sex X Status interactions were nonsignif,icant F 2 244 1 64 and P 2 449 1 61 Female.
Communal 3 55 3 59 3 69, The findings that women were judged to Agentic 3 74 2 63 2 85. have lower salaries than men regardless of Male, whether job titles were indicated suggest that Communal 3 41 3 58 3 48. the salary estimates may have functioned Agentic 3 52 2 43 2 78. largely as a measure of perceived wage dis, crimination To provide clear cut evidence that Note Means are on a 5 point scale larger numbers indicate. greater communion or agency Cell ns ranged from 78 to. lower status was associated with women more 85 For communal MS 0 54 for agentic MS 0 44. than with men the tendency to ascribe lower,salaries to women should have been especially. strong in conditions omitting job titles in 3 34 F l 456 9 95 p 002 Consistent. which the typical status difference was not with a significant Sex X Status interaction in. countered by information that equated wom Experiment 2 only F 2 456 3 46 p 05. en s and men s jobs Thus the absence of the this stronger communal tendency was ascribed. expected Sex X Status interaction in Experi to women vs men with low status or no job. ment 1 led us to include a purer indicator of titles ps 01 or smaller but was nonsig. status job title guesses in Experiment 2 nificant with high status job titles. Job title guesses For stimulus persons On agency the main effects of sex and status. without job titles in Experiment 2 a greater were highly significant in both experiments. proportion of subjects job title guesses were Women were perceived as more agentic than. categorized as high status vs low status for men For Experiment 1 Ms 3 08 versus. male than for female stimulus persons High 2 92 respectively F 472 7 80 p 005. status job titles were ascribed to 48 men and for Experiment 2 Ms 3 53 versus 3 37 F l. 30 women and low status job titles were as 456 9 99 p 002 Consistent with the. cribed to 30 men and 39 women A loglinear significant main effects of status for Exper. analysis of the cell frequencies Bishop Fien iment 1 F 2 472 121 01 and for Exper. berg Holland 1975 Davis 1974 revealed iment 2 F 2 456 21 33 ps 001 persons. a significant likelihood ratio chi square G2 with high status job titles were perceived as. 4 82 p 05 for the interaction between sex,of stimulus person and judged job title status.
Thus the job title measure of inferred status Table 2. yielded clear evidence that without knowing Mean Ratings qfOn the Job Behavior of Female. job titles subjects inferred that women held and Male Employees Who Varied in Status. lower status positions than men of Job Title Experiment 2. Stimulus High Low No, Beliefs About Stereotypic Attributes person status status title. Subjects mean ratings of the stimulus per Female, sons communion and agency appear in Tables Communal 3 48 3 53 3 57. 1 and 2 On communion the main effect of Agentic 3 77 3 37 3 46. sex of stimulus person was marginally signif Male, icant in Experiment 1 and significant in Ex Communal 3 51 3 21 3 30. Agentic 3 61 3 23 3 25,periment 2 Women were perceived as more. communal than men For Experiment 1 Ms Note Means are on a 5 point scale larger numbers indicate. 3 61 versus 3 48 respectively F l 472 3 71 greater communion or agency All cell s 80 For com. p 06 for Experiment 2 Ms 3 53 versus munal MS 0 41 for agentic MS 0 34. 740 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN, more agentic than persons whose job titles were of the findings across four organizational set.
not given or persons with low status job titles tings reduces the likelihood that artifacts arose. For Experiment 1 Ms 3 63 versus 2 81 for from beliefs about particular work environ. high status versus no job title and 3 63 versus ments Third the generalizability of the find. 2 53 for high versus low status job title re ings across two different types of ratings per. spectively ps 001 for Experiment 2 Ms sonality traits and on the job behavior reduces. 3 69 versus 3 36 and 3 69 versus 3 30 re the likelihood that artifacts arose from insuf. spectively ps 001 In Experiment 1 the ficient sensitivity of global trait ratings Be. contrast between the no job title and low cause inferences from job titles to attributes. status job title conditions was also significant of on the job behavior should be easier and. p 001 5 more direct than inferences from job titles to. personality traits the job behavior ratings of,Discussion Experiment 2 should have maximized the. Several aspects of these findings are unfa possibility of obtaining any effects of explicit. vorable to the hypothesis that the stereotypes and implicit variation of job status. of female communion and male agency stem Our findings may be more consistent with. from having observed women in lower status the hypothesis that distributions of women and. roles than men First our status difference ex men into homemaker and employee roles un. planation of gender stereotypes implies that derlie gender stereotypes Because all of the. perceptions of lower status persons resemble stimulus persons presented in Experiments 1. those of average women and that perceptions and 2 were described as employed the relative. of higher status persons resemble those of av absence of gender stereotypic perceptions may. erage men This expectation was only partly reflect the inclusion of this information about. confirmed Persons with low status job titles occupational role Therefore our third ex. were perceived as considerably less agentic than periment tested the hypothesis that gender ste. persons with high status job titles but there reotypes stem from perceivers observations of. was no difference in communion the distribution of women and men into the. The second and most surprising aspect of roles of homemaker and employed person In. the findings that discount the status hypothesis this experiment some female and male stim. is the counterstereotypic effect that the sex of ulus persons were described as employees and. the stimulus persons had on the ascription of some as homemakers and the occupation of. agentic traits Women were perceived as more others was not indicated. agentic than men despite the perceptions that One implication of the homemaker versus. a women earn less than men and hold lower employee explanation of gender stereotypes is. status positions and b persons in lower status that the differences perceived between persons. positions are less agentic than persons in higher in these two occupational roles parallel the. status positions Furthermore women were stereotypic differences between women and. perceived as more communal than men even men Therefore homemakers were expected. though persons in lower and higher status po to be perceived as more communal and less. sitions did not differ in perceived communion agentic than employed persons It also follows. These perceived sex differences were rela that women and men are perceived stereotyp. tively small despite their statistical signifi ically when their role assignment as home. cance The differences were no larger than 19,on a 5 point scale with an effect size d of. 30 Cohen 1977 Nevertheless several as 5, In Experiments 1 and 2 several effects of employment. pects of the experiments promote confidence setting were also obtained on beliefs and on inferred status. in the reliability of the findings First the gen Only one of these effects involved the sex of the stimulus. eralizability of the findings across subjects re persons Consistent with this Sex X Setting interaction. cruited at two universities and by two different obtained in Experiment 2 on perceived agency p 01. methods subject pool and random sampling subjects rated women s behavior as more agentic than men s. in the bank and the supermarket ps 01 as marginally. at public campus locations reduces the like more agentic than men s in the university department of. lihood that artifacts arose from particular sub biology p 09 but not different from men s in the. ject populations Second the generalizability medical clinic. GENDER STEREOTYPES 741, maker or employee is unknown because per employees allowed us to examine these se. ceivers have observed that more women than lection considerations. men are homemakers and fewer women are The greater agency ascribed to employed. employees Furthermore the homemaker women vs men is not plausibly explained. employee analysis implies that women and in terms of a belief that discrimination makes. men are perceived similarly if they have the it necessary for female employees to be more. same occupational role that is if both are qualified than their male counterparts People. homemakers or both are employees Yet con are likely to believe that discrimination exists. sistent with the agency findings of the first two in relation to high status positions or other. experiments and inconsistent with our social male dominated jobs for which traditionally. role analysis we expected that female em there were barriers excluding or discouraging. ployees would be perceived as somewhat more women However in Experiments 1 and 2. agentic than male employees We were less subjects were found to believe in women s su. confident that female employees would be periority in agentic qualities when low status. perceived as more communal because of the as well as high status job titles were given It. marginal significance of this finding in Ex seems unlikely that subjects believed that. periment 1 women face discrimination in obtaining the. The design of our third experiment also al low status positions used in our research e g. lowed us to examine two possible explanations bank teller supermarket cashier. of the relatively high agency ratings of em, ployed women One explanation is that re Experiment 3.
pondents are no longer willing to derogate,women on stereotype questionnaires because Method. of changes in attitudes toward women greater Subjects. wariness about revealing one s stereotyping, or possibly other causes This explanation im A total of 108 females and 132 males participated One. female and one male experimenter each randomly selected. plies that it would be impossible to replicate half of the subjects by choosing persons seated in a coffee. the stereotypes of women and men obtained shop or general library at Purdue University The subjects. by other investigators e g Broverman et al mean age was 21 61 years. 1972 Spence Helmreich 1978 The inclu Procedure, sion of average woman and average man cues Each subject read a brief description e g an average. in our third experiment allowed us to examine man or an average woman who is employed full time. this issue and rated this stimulus person The descriptions varied. According to another explanation for the according to a 2 X 3 female vs male X employee vs. high level of agency ascribed to employed homemaker vs no occupational description factorial de. women subjects believed that women are less, likely to be employed than men and therefore Manipulation of Independent Variables. inferred that higher standards are applied to Sex of stimulus person The stimulus persons were. women than to men by employers or by described as an average woman or as an average man. women themselves when women are selected Occupation of stimulus person The stimulus persons. for jobs This selection hypothesis implies that were described as employed full time or as caring for a. people who are thus highly selected or self home and children and not employed outside of the home. selected for a role are believed to be more or no occupational description was provided. extreme in role relevant characteristics If Measuring Instruments. agentic qualities are believed to be relevant to, job success employed women would be per Beliefs about stereotypic attributes The measures de.
scribed for Experiment 1 were used, ceived as being more agentic than employed Inferred likelihood of employment For the stimulus. men It also follows that male homemakers persons for whom no occupational description was pro. would be perceived as being more communal vided subjects indicated on an 11 point scale ranging. than female homemakers provided that com from 0 chance to 100 chance the likelihood that the. person was employed full time, munal characteristics are believed to be rel Inferred job status For stimulus persons described as. evant to the homemaker role The inclusion employed full time the salary measure described in Ex. of homemaker stimulus persons as well as periment 1 was used. 742 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN,Results Table 3. Mean Ratings of Stereotypic Attributes of, The principal data analyses were Sex of Females and Males Who Varied in. Stimulus Person X Occupation of Stimulus Occupation Experiment 3. Person ANOVAS,Stimulus occupational, Inferred Likelihood of Employment and person Employee Homemaker description.
Inferred Job Status, Subjects who received no occupational in Communal 3 31 4 22 3 81. formation about the stimulus person inferred Agentic 3 69 3 02 3 00. that the woman was less likely than the man Male, to be employed full time Ms 56 50 vs Communal 3 39 4 11 3 03. Agentic 3 40 2 90 3 46,79 75 respectively F l 78 30 39 p. 001 Subjects who rated employees ascribed Note Means are on a 5 point scale larger numbers indicate. lower salaries to the woman M 15 615 greater communion or agency All cell ns 40 For com. than the man M 21 193 F 78 13 06 munal MS 0 33 for agentic MSe 0 31. Beliefs About Stereotypic Attributes planned contrasts employees regardless of. their sex were perceived as more agentic than, Subjects mean ratings of communion and homemakers ps 001 for female and male. agency appear in Table 3 On communion stimulus persons In addition for stimulus. the significant main effects of sex F 234 persons without an occupational description. 13 32 p 001 and occupation F 2 234 the traditional gender stereotype of the man. 49 08 p 001 should be interpreted in the as more agentic than the woman was obtained. context of a significant Sex X Occupation in p 001 The female employee was perceived. teraction F 2 234 12 34 p 001 These as more agentic than the male employee p. effects are best described in terms of the 025 whereas the female and the male home. planned contrasts implied by the hypotheses maker were not perceived to differ The agentic. As expected homemakers regardless of their tendency of the woman without an occupa. sex were perceived as more communal than tional description did not differ from that of. employees p 001 for female stimulus per the female homemaker but was less than that. sons p 005 for male stimulus persons In of the female employee p 001 The agentic. addition for stimulus persons without occu tendency of the man without an occupational. pational descriptions the traditional gender description was greater than that of the male. stereotype of the woman as being more com homemaker p 001 but not different from. munal than the man was obtained p 001 that of the male employee. The female and male employees were not per These ANOVA findings are generally consis. ceived to differ in communion nor were the tent with the theory that gender stereotypes. female and male homemakers The communal stem from the observed distribution of women. tendency of the woman whose occupation was and men into homemaker and employee roles. not given was less than that of the female Therefore it is worthwhile to examine the. homemaker p 001 but greater than that correlations between a inferred role distri. of the employed woman p 001 The com butions of the stimulus persons who lacked. munal tendency of the man whose occupation occupational descriptions and b the ascrip. was not given was less than that of the male tion of gender stereotypic attributes to them. homemaker p 001 or of the employed Overall the higher the inferred likelihood that. man p 005 the average woman or man was employed the. On agency the significant main effect of lower was her or his communion r 78 34. occupation F 2 234 21 88 001 p 01 and the higher was her or his agency. should be interpreted in the context of the r 78 41 p 001 Yet inferred likelihood. significant Sex X Occupation interaction F 2 of employment should have been a stronger. 234 10 14 p m According to the predictor of Stereotypic perceptions for the. GENDER STEREOTYPES 743, woman than for the man This differential butes of the stimulus persons whose occupa.
predictability would be expected because like tions were described reveal even more clearly. lihood of employment for the average man that social roles underlie gender stereotypes. was relatively invariant SD 15 61 for av Subjects believed that regardless of sex per. erage man vs 21 31 for average woman F 39 sons described as homemakers differed from. 39 1 86 p 05 no doubt because this persons described as employees Female and. likelihood was generally quite high see the male homemakers were perceived to be like. previous subsection of results For the woman stereotypic women high in communion and. greater inferred likelihood of employment was low in agency whereas female and male em. associated with slightly less communion ployees were perceived to be like stereotypic. r 38 19 p 25 and greater agency men low in communion and high in agency. r 38 43 p 01 For the man the cor Another important aspect of subjects beliefs. relations between inferred likelihood of em about the stimulus persons with occupational. ployment and perceived communion r 38 descriptions is that the females and males were. 13 and agency r 38 01 were very small perceived relatively equivalently once their so. and nonsignificant cial role as employee or homemaker was spec. ified The only exception to this pattern and, Disctission an exception that demands explanation is the. significantly greater perceived agency of em, The findings of Experiment 3 were generally ployed women compared with employed men. favorable to the hypothesis that a sex difference The comparisons between same sex persons. in the distribution of women and men into who differed in occupation were also moder. homemaker and employee roles underlies the ately consistent with our role distribution the. stereotype that women are communal and men ory of gender stereotypes Because subjects. are agentic Two findings confirmed prereq judged that there was roughly a 50 50 chance. uisite conditions for testing this hypothesis a that the average woman was employed per. The average woman and man without occu ceptions of her personal attributes should have. pational descriptions were perceived stereo fallen between those of the employed woman. typically i e the woman was perceived as and the female homemaker Although this ex. more communal and the man as more agentic pectation was fulfilled see Table 3 the average. and b the average man was judged as con woman s perceived agency did not differ sig. siderably more likely than the average woman nificantly from that of the homemaker Be. to be employed cause subjects considered it quite likely that. The correlational analyses relating likeli the average man was employed their beliefs. hood of employment to the attributes of the about his personal attributes should have been. average woman and man provided one test of similar to their beliefs about the employed. whether observations of women s and men s man This expectation was fulfilled for. differing occupational roles account for ste agency but the average man was perceived as. reotypes The likelihood that the average significantly less communal than the em. woman was employed related positively to her ployed man 6. agency and negatively albeit weakly to her,communion In other words subjects who re. ported that women are often employed tended,to view women counterstereotypically and 6. In the interpretation of these findings subjects judg. those who reported that women are less often ments of the probability that the average woman and man. employed and presumably more often home are employed should not be treated as exact estimates of. makers tended to view women stereotypically the observed distributions of people into employee and. homemaker roles One reason for our caution is that males. Comparable findings were not obtained for who are not employed have probably been observed in. men probably because they are generally em largely different roles than females who are not employed. ployees and rarely homemakers in the natu Whereas such females are usually homemakers probably. rally occurring situations in which subjects such males are retired or seeking employment Therefore. had made their previous observations the subjects judgment that there is an 80 chance that. the average man is employed does not imply that 20 of. The ANOVA findings concerning the attri men have been observed as homemakers It also does not. 744 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN, Although the findings of this experiment rather than a difference in how they are per.
are generally supportive of the idea that per ceived If stimulus persons are implicitly com. ceived sex differences stem from perceivers pared with same sex reference groups this se. observations of women and men in differing mantic interpretation suggests that female. occupational roles they do not explain the employees are implicitly compared with other. tendency for employed women to be perceived females and therefore are judged as very agen. as more agentic than employed men 7 It is tic whereas male employees are implicitly. noteworthy that this finding was obtained in compared with other males and therefore are. Experiments 1 and 2 for the stimulus persons judged as not especially agentic This inter. without job titles as well as in Experiment 3 pretation also suggests that male homemakers. for the average employed persons because these are implicitly compared with other males and. stimulus persons were probably thought to therefore are judged as very communal. have lower status positions if they were female whereas female homemakers are implicitly. As demonstrated in Experiments 1 and 2 compared with other females and therefore. lower status employees were believed to be less are not judged as especially communal Al. agentic than higher status employees there though female employees were perceived as. fore any tendency to ascribe lower status to more agentic than male employees male. women would tend to counteract any factors homemakers were not perceived as more com. making them appear more agentic than men munal than female homemakers The fact that. Both of the explanations that we introduced female and male homemakers were perceived. earlier for this sex difference in agentic qualities equivalently then does not support the ex. were discounted by the findings from Exper planation that the perceived sex differences. iment 3 The idea that subjects would be un are an artifact of differences in the reference. willing to derogate women on stereotype ques group implicitly used by subjects when rating. tionnaires was discounted by their perception females and males Yet so little is known about. of the average woman as significantly less how people use implicit comparison standards. agentic than the average man The other ex that we cannot be completely certain that such. planation of female employees greater agency a process has no relevance to our findings. was that categories of people e g women Because our experiments so consistently re. who are relatively uncommon in a social role vealed that female employees were perceived. e g employee are believed to be more strin as more agentic than their male counterparts. gently selected in terms of the requirements and because this finding is counterstereotypic. of the role than people who commonly occupy and perhaps important we considered another. the role This explanation was discounted by explanation of the finding Accordingly the. the finding that the male homemaker who is fact that employed women often balance. considerably rarer than the female employee,was not perceived to differ from the female. homemaker in communion the quality that, subjects believed typical of homemakers 8 Other investigators have reported higher perceived. Yet another explanation of employed wom agency and competence in females than males yet in these. en s higher agency is that this perceived gender studies the situation faced by the stimulus person was. judged to be especially difficult or demanding for women. difference reflects a semantic or response lan Abramson Goldberg Greenberg Abramson 1977. guage difference in the way males and females Taynor Deaux 1973 or the stimulus materials may. are judged e g Manis 1971 Upshaw 1969 have implied employment or special competence Deaux. Lewis in press Also in Experiment 3 the communal, ratings of employed women and men did not differ al. though they did differ significantly in Experiment 2 and. marginally in Experiment 1 Therefore only the sex dif. imply that the average man s personality attributes would ference in employees agency appears reliable and con. be perceived as between those ascribed to employees and sequently requires explanation. those ascribed to homemakers Perhaps the low level of Yet it could be that this selection hypothesis pertains. communion ascribed to the average man reflects the un to the employee role because perceivers know that people. favorably evaluated roles ascribed to the 20 of men not are screened for employment but not to the homemaker. thought to be employed e g being retired seeking em role because perceivers are uncertain about whether people. ployment are screened for the occupation of homemaker. GENDER STEREOTYPES 745, two demanding roles homemaker and em Parental status of stimulus person The stimulus per. ployee may account for the relatively high sons whose parental status was provided were described. as having children at home or not having children The. agency ratings of such women Perceivers may unmarried woman or man with children at home was. have observed these agentic qualities among further described as a single parent to aid subjects in. the women who experience this potential role interpreting this potentially ambiguous description For. overload and role conflict the remaining stimulus persons no information about. children was provided,To enable us to test this double burden.
explanation subjects in a fourth experiment, rated the personality attributes of an employed Measuring Instruments. woman or man described as either married or Subjects beliefs about stereotypic attributes and job. single and as either having or not having chil status were assessed using measures described in Exper. dren at home Other subjects rated an em iment 1 The subjects also estimated the number of hours. that the stimulus person worked per day doing household. ployed woman or man whose marital and pa and family related work For stimulus persons whose mar. rental statuses were hot described Should the ital and parental statuses were not provided subjects Used. double burden explanation of women s greater an 11 point rating scale ranging from 0 to 100 chance. agency be correct employed women with to rate the likelihood that the person was married On a. second similar scale the subjects rated the likelihood that. family responsibilities especially involving the person had children at home. children would be regarded as particularly, agentic Family responsibilities would increase Results and Discussion. the agency ascribed to employed men only if, such men did not have wives who typically The principal data analyses were Sex of. would carry out the household duties The Stimulus Person X Marital Status of Stimulus. single father would fulfill this criterion and Person X Parental Status of Stimulus Person. as a consequence might also be perceived as ANOVAS with the error term including the two. especially agentic control conditions which omitted the infor. mation about marital and parental statuses,Experiment 4. Inferences About Marriage Children,Method Household Work and Job Status.
Subjects For employees whose marital and parental, A total of 108 females and 135 males participated in statuses were omitted the woman was judged. groups of about 15 in a laboratory setting to fulfill a psy less likely to be married M 54 17 than. chology course requirement at Purdue University One the man M 76 00 F 47 20 50 p. female experimenter administered all stimulus materials 001 She was also judged less likely to have. Subjects mean age was 19 33 years children at home than her male counterpart. Ms 43 75 versus 66 00 respectively,Procedure F l 47 16 22 p 001 Thus subjects did. Each subject read a brief description of a full time em not consider it highly likely that the average. ployee e g an average man who is employed full time employed woman faced a double burden of. is married and has no children and rated this stimulus family and employment responsibilities. person The descriptions varied according to a 2 X 2 X Analyses of subjects estimates of the num. 2 employed female vs employed male X married vs not. married X children at home vs no children at home ber of hours per day the employed persons. factorial design Two control conditions were provided a spent doing household and family related work. female for whom neither marital nor parental status was revealed only one significant effect Persons. provided and a male for whom neither status was provided with children were judged to do more work. than persons without children Ms 4 91 ver, Manipulation of Independent Variables sus 3 34 respectively F l 233 6 96 p. Sex of stimulus person The stimulus persons were 01 Subjects failed to acknowledge that mar. described as an average employed woman or an average ried female employees spend more time on. employed man household work than married male employees. Marital status of stimulus person The stimulus persons. whose marital status was provided were described as mar even though this sex difference has been well. ried or as not married For the remaining stimulus persons documented in sociological literature on. no information about marital status was provided housework e g Hartmann 1981. 746 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN, Analyses of subjects salary estimates rep nation subjects in a fifth experiment rated the. licated the effect of sex obtained in our pre personal attributes of a female or male em. vious experiments Women were judged to ployee described as employed by choice or. have lower salaries than men Ms 18 074 employed out of necessity Other subjects rated. versus 25 055 respectively F l 233 a female or male employee about whom no. 38 29 p 001 choice information was provided,Beliefs About Stereotypic Attributes Experiment 5.
Subjects mean ratings of communion and,agency appear in Table 4 On communion Subjects. the main effects of marital and parental sta A total of 110 females and 132 males participated One. tuses were both significant Married employees female and one male experimenter each randomly selected. half of the subjects by choosing persons seated in a coffee. were judged as being more communal than shop or general library at Purdue University Subjects. single employees Ms 3 54 versus 3 26 re mean age was 20 59 years. spectively F l 233 9 60 p 01 Em, ployees with children at home were judged as Procedure. more communal than employees without chil, dren at home Ms 3 68 versus 3 11 respec ployee Each subject read a brief description of a full time em. 9 e g an average woman who is employed full, tively F 233 41 75 p 001 time and who is employed because she wants to work and. On agency only the sex effect proved sig not because she has to work and rated this stimulus. nificant Replicating the three previous ex person The descriptions varied according to a 2 X 3 female. periments female employees were perceived vs male X employed by choice vs employed out of ne. as more agentic than male employees Ms cessity vs no choice information factorial design. 3 75 versus 3 59 respectively F 233, 7 27 p 01 calculated on the basis of all Manipulation of Independent Variables.
10 conditions 10 Thus contrary to the double Sex of stimulus person The stimulus persons were. burden hypothesis neither marital nor paren described. employed man,as an average employed woman or an average. tal status influenced the agency ascribed to Choice of stimulus person to be employed The stimulus. employed women or men persons were described as employed because they want to. In view of this nonconfirmation of the dou work and not because they have to work or employed. ble burden explanation of women s perceived because they have to work and not because they want to. work or no information about employment choice was. agency and in view of the continued reliability provided. of the finding itself we considered yet another, explanation Perhaps employed women are Measuring Instruments. considered more agentic than their male Subjects beliefs about Stereotypic attributes and job. counterparts because they are more likely to status were assessed with the measures described in Ex. have chosen to be employed Because agency,evidently typifies employees perhaps because. most jobs require and reward agentic behav 9, ior observing that women often are employed Consistent with a Sex of Stimulus Person X Parental. Status of Stimulus Person interaction F 233 5 86, by choice may have led perceivers to infer that p 05 male employees with children at home were per.
such women are agentic This explanation of ceived as considerably more communal than male em. the effects of choice on stereotype formation ployees without children at home Ms 3 76 versus 2 97. follows from correspondent inference theory respectively p 001 whereas female employees with. Jones Davis 1965 which suggests that children at home were not perceived as so greatly different. M 3 59 from female employees without children at, perceivers more often infer that an employee home M 3 25 although this difference remained sig. possesses the personal qualities she or he man nificant for the females p 01. ifests behaviorally if it appears that the em For all five role descriptions the female agency mean. ployee has freely chosen to work and has not was larger than the male mean Yet this agency sex dif. ference became quite small for the stimulus persons for. been required to work by virtue of her or his whom marital and parental statuses were not described. life situation or sex role However in this female stimulus person condition there. In a test of this freedom of choice expla were two unusually low agency scores. GENDER STEREOTYPES 747, Mean Ratings of Stereotypic Attributes of Female and Male Employees Who Varied in Marital and. Parental Statuses Experiment 4,Stimulus Married Married no Single Single no No. person children children children children description. Communal 3 77 3 38 3 42 3 11 3 30,Agentic 3 70 3 83 3 91 3 84 3 49. Communal 3 86 3 10 3 66 2 87 3 40,Agentic 3 59 3 54 3 75 3 60 3 45.
Note Means are on a 5 point scale larger numbers indicate greater communion or agency Cell ns ranged from 22 to. 27 For communal A 5e 0 37 for agentic MS 0 24, periment 1 For the stimulus persons about whom no choice ployees working out of necessity M 3 10. information was provided subjects used an 11 point scale ps 01 or smaller. ranging from 0 to 100 chance to rate the likelihood. that the person worked because she he has to and not On agency the main effects of sex and choice. because she he wants to were both significant as was the interaction. between these variables Women were per,Results ceived as more agentic than men Ms 3 54. The principal data analyses were Sex of vs 3 30 respectively J l 236 12 34 p. Stimulus Person X Choice of Stimulus Person 001 Consistent with the choice main effect. F 2t 236 89 54 p 001 employees work,to Be Employed ANOVAS. ing by choice were perceived as more agentic,than employees without choice information. Inferred Likelihood of Employment Out of Ms 3 86 versus 3 59 p 002 respectively. Necessity and Inferred Job Status who in turn were more agentic than employees. The average employed woman was judged working out of necessity M 2 80 p 001. less likely to be employed out of necessity than Consistent with the Sex X Choice interaction. the average employed man Ms 48 75 ver F 2 236 3 46 p 05 the tendency for. sus 67 33 respectively F l 78 11 50 women to be perceived as more agentic than. p 01 Also women were judged to have men was significant for employees without. lower salaries than men Ms 16 330 versus choice information p 001 and employees. 23 983 respectively F l 235 55 81 working out of necessity p 025 and non. 001 The main effect of the stimulus person s significant for employees working by choice. choice to be employed F 2 235 17 78 p Note also that for women the agency of the. 001 revealed that higher salaries were ascribed employee working by choice did not differ. to employees working by choice M from that of the employee without choice in. 23 265 or to employees without choice in formation and these two employees were more. formation M 2 1 304 than to employees agentic than the employee working out of ne. working out of necessity M 15 977 cessity ps 001 For men the agency of. ps 001 the employee working by choice was greater,than that of the employee with no choice in.
Beliefs About Stereotypic Attributes formation p 001 and these two employees. were more agentic than the employee working, Subjects mean ratings of communion and out of necessity ps 001. agency appear in Table 5 On communion These ANOVA findings generally support the. only the main effect of choice proved signif hypothesis that employed women are perceived. icant F 2 236 7 41 p 001 Greater as more agentic than employed men because. communion was ascribed to employees work women have been observed to exercise greater. ing by choice M 3 43 or employees without choice about being employed Thus it is. choice information M 3 35 than to em worthwhile to examine for employees about. 748 ALICE H EAGLY AND VALERIE J STEFFEN, Table 5 gardless of their sex employees working by. Mean Ratings of Stereotypic Attributes of Female choice were perceived as more agentic than. and Male Employees Who Varied in Choice to employees working out of necessity Further. Be Employed Experiment 5 more perceived agency was similar for the. women and men about whom choice infor, Stimulus Employed out of No choice mation was provided When employed by. person by choice necessity information choice the woman and the man did not differ. in agency although when employed out of ne, Female cessity the woman was perceived as somewhat. Communal 3 38 3 23 3 41,Agentic 3 86 2 95 3 80,more agentic than the man.
Male In addition it should be noted that the, Communal 3 45 2 98 3 27 comparisons between stimulus persons of the. Agentic 3 85 2 66 3 38 same sex are relatively consistent with our. Note Means are on a 5 point scale larger numbers indicate. freedom of choice hypothesis Because sub, greater communion or agency Cell ns ranged from 40 to jects believed that it was moderately likely that. 41 For communal MS 0 31 for agentic MS 0 27 the average employed woman had freedom of. choice her agency should have been perceived,as similar to that of the woman employed by. whom no choice information was provided choice As expected the agency of the average. the correlation between freedom of choice and employed woman did not differ from that of. agency Overall the more likely an employee the woman employed by choice and it was. was to be regarded as working out of necessity greater than that of the woman employed out. rather than choice the lower was her or his of necessity Because subjects believed that it. agency r 78 40 p 001 However this was moderately unlikely that the average em. relation was considerably stronger for the fe ployed man had freedom of choice his agency. male employee r 38 55 p 001 than should have been perceived as lower than that. the male employee r 38 09 ns of the man employed by choice As expected. the agency of the average employed man was, Discussion lower than that of the man employed by choice. although higher than that of the man employed, In Experiment 5 the average employed out of necessity.
woman was once again rated as more agentic Even though the communion findings are. than the average employed man and the find not relevant to our hypothesis it should be. ings of this experiment favored the hypothesis noted that lack of choice also lowered the. that this sex difference stems from perceivers stimulus persons communal tendency The. observations that women are more likely than fact that the effect of choice on communion. men to have chosen to be employed One of was weaker than its effect on agency may ex. the findings favoring this hypothesis is that the plain why women s greater freedom of choice. average employed woman was judged as more did not cause female employees to be perceived. likely than the average employed man to be as more communal than male employees as. working by choice rather than necessity Fur well as more agentic Consistent with the weak. thermore on a correlational basis the less,likely subjects believed it was that the average. employed woman works out of necessity the, more agency they ascribed to her The meaning of these comparisons is necessarily. somewhat ambiguous because the choice information may. Stronger evidence that sex differences in have had different implications for males than for females. choice to be employed underlie the greater For example a man employed by choice may be perceived. perceived instrumentality of female vs male as independently wealthy whereas a woman employed by. employees is provided by subjects beliefs choice may be perceived as married and merely in com. about the agency of employees described as fortable financial circumstances Similarly a woman em. ployed out of necessity may be perceived as single or in. either having or lacking freedom of choice especially poor financial circumstances whereas a man. The choice information strongly affected employed out of necessity may be perceived as fairly typical. agency ratings in the expected direction Re of all men as suggested by the findings presented above. GENDER STEREOTYPES 749, effect of choice on communion in this series operationally defined as beliefs that certain. of experiments nonsignificant tendencies in attributes differentiate women and men see. the female direction were found in the majority Ashmore Del Boca 1981 arise when. of communion comparisons and in Experi women and men are observed typically to. ment 2 which had a large number of subjects carry out different social roles. the comparison reached significance Any theory of the content of gender stereo. As we noted earlier the relation between types should account for the major perceived. freedom of choice and agency may be attri gender differences documented in past re. butionally mediated Because jobs are thought search namely the agentic qualities ascribed. to require agentic behavior observations that to men and the communal qualities ascribed. members of a particular group are generally to women These differences should be ac. employed by choice may favor the correspon counted for by one or both of the major dif. dent inference that such people possess agentic ferences in the way women and men are dis. personality attributes It is also possible that tributed into social roles namely the con. employed women s greater freedom of choice centration of women in lower positions in. implies that they are more qualified because hierarchies of status and authority and in the. of selection or self selection in terms of agentic homemaker rather than the employee occu. qualities That is mainly those women who pational role In our research only the home. are agentic have chosen to worjt or have been maker employee difference appeared to ac. specially selected to work see also Footnote count for the subjects beliefs that women are. 8 An additional explanation stems from the especially communal and men especially. finding that activities perceived to be voluntary agentic Although status differences did not. rather than required are associated with more account for these beliefs it would be surprising. positive affect and higher involvement Csik in view of the importance that sociologists have. szentmihalyi Figurski 1982 Therefore the accorded to hierarchy as a fundamental aspect. higher ratings of the agency and communion of social roles e g Blau 1964 Weber 1947. of employees who freely chose to work might if observed status differences did not underlie. be a consequence of the positive affect that any beliefs about gender differentiating traits. has been observed to characterize this major and behaviors On the contrary status differ. portion of such individuals lives ences have been shown to account for the belief. that women are more compliant than men,General Discussion Eagly Wood 1982 12. In documenting that occupational roles un, According to our framework social struc derlie belief in female communal qualities and.
ture accounts for the content of stereotypes male agentic qualities our research has shown. or more exactly the observed distribution of that beliefs about women resemble those about. groups into various aspects of social structure homemakers and that beliefs about men re. underlies stereotypes Although such an ex semble those about employed persons In ad. planation may account for stereotypes about dition our research has shown that beliefs. other subgroups within societies e g races about what is typical of homemakers and em. we have confined our investigation to gender ployees override beliefs about what is typical. stereotypes by hypothesizing that the observed of women and men whereas the converse does. distribution of women and men into social not occur Beliefs about what is typical of. roles underlies these stereotypes In particular,our experiments investigated whether per. ceivers beliefs about women and men stem 12, Indeed still other aspects of the distribution of men. from their previous observations of women and women in society may affect beliefs about the sexes. and men in differing statuses within work For example Kiesler 1975 suggested that because men. hierarchies and in differing occupational roles outnumber women as successful achievers in many oc. Because the content of gender stereotypes cupations perceivers tend to evaluate an individual wom. arises from perceivers observations of people s an s achievements less favorably than an individual man s. even when their products are objectively equal Perceivers. activities and these activities are determined judgments of an individual s success may thus reflect the. primarily by social roles gender stereotypes probability of success for persons of the individual s gender.


Related Books

CRIMINAL NO. 19-^, r'tf>/)C^ V.

CRIMINAL NO 19 r tf gt C V

20. PR DOE regulations required a selection process, known as Request For Proposal "RFP", to award a contract for the services involved in the Colon & Ponce proposal submitted to the PR DOE. 21. Although the PR DOE Office of Federal Affairs had not requested services such as those

EGAC Technical Guidelines for Calibration and Testing ...

EGAC Technical Guidelines for Calibration and Testing

characterized by acceptable procedures such as those as recommended in ISO Guide 35:2017, Reference materials General and statistical principles for - certification. These procedures may include: analysis/testing by a definitive method; analysis/testing by a number of methods based on

BOOK CATALOG 2018 - Kagero

BOOK CATALOG 2018 Kagero

Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. D-25, D-27, D-30, D-40 models Kagero Publishing Product details The P-47D was the most produced version of the Thunderbolt fighter. From overall number of 15 683 P-47s built the 12 609 of them were the version D. The first trial P-47D left the factory in September 1942. The first serial version of the P-47D was the D-

IMPROVED PETROPHYSICAL EVALUATION OF CONSOLIDATED ...

IMPROVED PETROPHYSICAL EVALUATION OF CONSOLIDATED

spwla 54th annual logging symposium, june 22-26, 2013 1 improved petrophysical evaluation of consolidated calcareous turbidite sequences with multi-component induction, magnetic resonance, resistivity images, and

PETMiner - A visual analysis tool for petrophysical ...

PETMiner A visual analysis tool for petrophysical

[1], Spot?re [2] and Interactive Petrophysics [3]). These dif?culties led us to develop a novel visualization tool called PETMiner, which transforms the ease with which sparse petrophysics data may be analysed. Our work takes the form of a design study [4], and in the following sections of this paper describe key use cases that are ...

Benefits of Integrating Rock Physics with Petrophysics

Benefits of Integrating Rock Physics with Petrophysics

Benefits of Integrating Rock Physics with Petrophysics Five key reasons to employ an integrated, iterative workflow Figure 1: Petrophysics combines well log, core, mudlog, and other disparate data sources for the purpose of evaluating, predicting, and establishing formation lithology.

CAPITAL DIVISION

CAPITAL DIVISION

It is seen below in its 1925-1938 form and on the right as a similar trestle appeared in 2015. The model trestle bents have been cut from cabinet grade plywood and, based on a technique suggested by a British modeling magazine, they are being coated with white glue to cover up the laminations and seal the wood.

States of Eugenics: Institutions and Practices of ...

States of Eugenics Institutions and Practices of

I States of Eugenics: Institutions and Practices of Compulsory Sterilization in California Alex Wellerstein Between 1909 and the early 1950s, the state of California ...

HANDBOOK OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY

HANDBOOK OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY

HANDBOOK OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY Edited by JOHN T. CACIOPPO University of Chicago LOUIS G. TASSINARY Texas A&M University GARY G. BERNTSON Ohio State University

IMPLEMENTASI MANAJEMEN STRATEGI ANALISIS SWOT DI MTsN I ...

IMPLEMENTASI MANAJEMEN STRATEGI ANALISIS SWOT DI MTsN I

Hasil penelitian ini menggambarkan strategi manajemen dan analisis SWOT. Strategi manajemen di MTsN I Yogyakarta terdapat perumusan visi, misi, dan tujuan yang mana terdapat revisi atau perubahan kecil yang tidak melibatkan komponen stakeholder. Adanya MBM yang digunakan untuk menilai