↓ Skip to main content

Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
34 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
50 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
213 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1071 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Gender inequalities in the workplace: the effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers’ sexism
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01400
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cailin S Stamarski, Leanne S Son Hing

Abstract

Gender inequality in organizations is a complex phenomenon that can be seen in organizational structures, processes, and practices. For women, some of the most harmful gender inequalities are enacted within human resources (HRs) practices. This is because HR practices (i.e., policies, decision-making, and their enactment) affect the hiring, training, pay, and promotion of women. We propose a model of gender discrimination in HR that emphasizes the reciprocal nature of gender inequalities within organizations. We suggest that gender discrimination in HR-related decision-making and in the enactment of HR practices stems from gender inequalities in broader organizational structures, processes, and practices. This includes leadership, structure, strategy, culture, organizational climate, as well as HR policies. In addition, organizational decision makers' levels of sexism can affect their likelihood of making gender biased HR-related decisions and/or behaving in a sexist manner while enacting HR practices. Importantly, institutional discrimination in organizational structures, processes, and practices play a pre-eminent role because not only do they affect HR practices, they also provide a socializing context for organizational decision makers' levels of hostile and benevolent sexism. Although we portray gender inequality as a self-reinforcing system that can perpetuate discrimination, important levers for reducing discrimination are identified.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,071 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 1068 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 181 17%
Student > Master 143 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 100 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 51 5%
Student > Postgraduate 35 3%
Other 118 11%
Unknown 443 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 169 16%
Social Sciences 108 10%
Psychology 104 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 3%
Arts and Humanities 30 3%
Other 177 17%
Unknown 449 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 356. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2024.
All research outputs
#91,881
of 25,845,749 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#174
of 34,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,024
of 270,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#5
of 579 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,845,749 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 579 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.