Ariana

Title:
Examining witnesses’ backlash against the target’s response to gender microaggressions

Abstract:
Research on witnessing microaggressions has found that people who witness gender microaggressions against a target subsequently evaluate the target more negatively (e.g., less competent). Relatedly, previous work has found that when targets respond to or confront the microaggression, their response is often criticized (e.g., they are seen as overreacting or troublemakers). In this talk, I will present results from a pilot study that investigated witnesses’ criticism of a target’s response to gender microaggressions and whether that criticism predicted more negative evaluations about the target. I also examine whether the witness’ gender plays a role in the kinds of criticism given (e.g., should have defended herself, took things personally) and in the evaluations they make (e.g., competence, negative agency).

Desiree

Title:
Assessing Men’s Proclivity to Recognizing Subtle Gender Bias Against Women in STEM

Abstract:
Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) frequently encounter gender bias (e.g., questioning of their STEM ability, assignment to secretarial roles). Given the subtle and ambiguous nature of contemporary sexism, people vary in their likelihood of recognizing subtly sexist interactions. Past research demonstrates that women are more sensitive to gender bias and more readily recognize it when it occurs. However, there remains a dearth of research related to men’s experiences in witnessing bias. In the present research, we ask: (1) what are the individual difference measures that contribute to men’s proclivity in recognizing subtle gender bias, (2) what are the affective consequences of recognizing subtle gender bias during group tasks, and (3) how do men’s affective states after witnessing subtle gender bias influence their interest in working with women in mixed-gendered groups? STEM-identified men read a fake transcript depicting a conversation between 3 STEM-identified college students (1 woman, 2 men). Participants were exposed to a transcript in which a man demonstrates subtle gender bias against a woman. After reading the transcript, participants completed measures related to their affect (state and collective), their impressions of the interaction (open and closed-ended), and behavioral measures related to the students in the transcript. Open-ended responses were coded to determine recognition of bias. Findings and implications for this work are discussed.