Men who have taken parental leave

Transcription

Running head: MEN AND PARENTAL LEAVE
Reactions Toward Men who Have Taken Parental Leave:
Does the Length of Parental Leave Matter?
The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0469-x
MEN AND PARENTAL LEAVE
2
Abstract
There is some evidence from research in the US that the work-related characteristics of men
who take parental leave may be evaluated negatively. In 2007, Germany introduced a new
law that encourages men to take parental leave by granting 2 extra months for the second
parent to stay home. Since the introduction of this law, the proportion of fathers taking
parental leave has increased substantially, but the majority of men take only the minimum
of 2 months. We investigated how taking a parental leave affected perceptions of men who
applied for a job that required high qualifications and whether a long parental leave of 12
months would lead to backlash effects. In two experimental studies, 203 students in
business-related subjects (105 women, 98 men) in South-Western Germany rated vignettes
of male applicants on gender role attributes (agency, communion) and work-related
characteristics. The applicant took either 0, 2, or 12 months of parental leave. A parental
leave resulted in higher communion and likeability ratings but did not make a difference for
ratings of agency, respect, competence, or hiring probability. Contrary to our hypothesis, a
long parental leave (12 months) compared with a short parental leave (2 months) did not
lead to backlash toward the men. The results indicate that in Germany, a country where
parental leave for fathers is encouraged, gender role attitudes have changed, and men
thereby have more gender role options.
Keywords: parental leave, fathers, gender role attributes, backlash, work-related
characteristics
3
Reactions Toward Men who Have Taken Parental Leave:
Does the Length of Parental Leave Matter?
Introduction
Today, men are still less likely than women to take parental leave, but they are
becoming more involved. In Great Britain, a survey of 1,000 fathers revealed that more men
were interested in taking parental leave than previously estimated (47% for 1 to 5 months
and 21% for 6 months; Burgess, 2011). Interviews with 83 working fathers showed that
fathers from both Great Britain and the US expressed a wish for more (paid) parental leave
(Kaufman, Lyonette, & Crompton, 2010). In Germany, a representative poll of 1,012
randomly chosen fathers found that nearly half of them wanted more time to spend with
their families (forsa Gesellschaft für Sozialforschung und statistische Analysen mbH, 2013).
Another representative German study of 1,000 fathers revealed that the vast majority
expressed the wish to help with their children’s development from the beginning and rated
time with their families as very important (Väter gGmbH, 2012). Women also expect their
partners to participate in childcare. A representative study of 1,000 participants in Austria
showed that the overwhelming majority of women and men believe a good father
contributes as much to child care as his partner (Kapella & Rille-Pfeiffer, 2007).
However, there are still large differences between countries in the amount of
parental leave taken by fathers. In several Nordic countries, leave rights for fathers have
been developed in order to encourage more men to take parental leave (Lammi-Taskula,
2008). In Sweden, for example, since 2002, the law has provided 60 days specifically for men
(Statistics Sweden, 2012). According to recent statistics, Swedish men comprise
approximately 44% of parents who take parental leave, and they take around 24% of all
parental leave days (Haas & Rostgaard, 2011; Statistics Sweden, 2012). In the US, the
4
situation is different because the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 applies only to a
subset of all parents and ensures only an unpaid parental leave of 12 weeks for parents. In a
study based on a representative sample in 2001, the majority of 4,638 fathers took only 1
week or even less parental leave (Nepomnyaschy & Waldfogel, 2007). In a nationally
representative U.S. sample covering the period from 1988 to 2004, merely 3% of U.S. men
had taken a parental leave of 1 month or more (Han, Ruhm, & Waldfogel, 2009).
This paper explores the situation in Germany, where policy has changed from
encouraging women to stay home with their child to encouraging parents to practice a more
equal sharing of parental leave (a paradigm-shift according to Reich, 2010). On the basis of
Social Role Theory and Backlash Theory, we investigated how men who take parental leaves
of different lengths are evaluated according to gender- and work-related characteristics and
whether they should expect negative psychological consequences. In two experimental
studies, we asked German business students to rate scenarios in which an applicant who
took or did not take parental leave was applying for a job. The main goal of our research was
to determine how men who took parental leave would be judged in a country with a new
father-friendly parental leave policy.
In Germany, the Federal Child-Raising Allowance Act, which was in place until 2006,
allowed men and women to take parental leave for up to 3 years after the birth of a child.
However, the child-raising allowance, which was paid as compensation for lost wages, was
not more than 300 Euros a month, thereby promoting a family with a working father and a
child-rearing mother (Reich, 2010). Men constituted only a small minority of parents who
took parental leave (3.5% in 2006, Ehlert & Rüling, 2008). In 2007, a new law — the Federal
Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act — was introduced. This law aimed to involve
more fathers in early childcare by including two main incentives to encourage men to take
5
parental leave: a higher parental allowance to compensate for lost wages (two thirds of a
person’s regular wage with an upper limit of 1800 Euros) and the introduction of a
regulation that rewards parents who share parental leave (Bundesministerium der Justiz und
für Verbraucherschutz, 2006).
Since then, after the birth of a child, a parent (the mother or the father) can receive a
parental allowance for a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 12 months. If both parents use
the parental benefits for at least 2 months, 2 further months of paid parental leave are
added, which are called partner months (or "Partnermonate" in German, BMFSFJ, 2013, p.
1). This means that the maximum financial support of 14 months can be achieved only if the
father takes at least 2 months of parental leave. These incentives have worked very well, and
after the new law was introduced, the number of fathers taking parental leave increased
enormously; for children born in 2012, men comprised 23.3%. However, the majority of
German fathers (78.2%) take only the minimum of 2 partner months (Statistisches
Bundesamt, 2014).
What are the reasons that fathers either do not take parental leave at all or take only
a short parental leave? Both economic factors (e.g., compensation) and psychological factors
(e.g., attitudes toward men who take parental leave) are likely to play a role. The influence
of income has been demonstrated in several countries. For example, in a review, Seward,
Yeatts, and Zottarelli (2002) stated that for men in the US and Sweden, an immediate (but
also long-term) loss of income was one of the main reasons for not taking parental leave. In
Germany, where parental leave covers 67% of regular pay up to 1800 Euros, men were more
likely to take parental leave when they earned less than their partner and when their
partner worked half or full time (Reich, 2010, based on the representative German
Microcensus).
6
However, psychological factors are also likely to be involved. In the working world,
women experience a penalty for motherhood (e.g. Heilman & Okimoto, 2008, U.S. student
and working adult samples). Does a penalty also exist for fatherhood, and might this prevent
men from taking parental leave? Several U.S. studies have investigated this possibility: Using
samples of both students and employees, two studies found that mothers were perceived as
less competent and suffered from hiring penalties, whereas fathers were rated as equally
competent and at least as successful at getting hired (in comparison to childless women or
men, Correll, Benard, & Paik, 2007; Heilman & Okimoto, 2008). Furthermore, women—but
not men—were viewed as less competent when they were described as parents (Cuddy,
Fiske, & Glick, 2004, U.S. student sample). In comparison, fathers were sometimes even
rated as more competent (Peplau & Fingerhut, 2004, U.S. student sample) and warmer than
childless men (Cuddy et al., 2004, U.S. student sample). However, stay-at-home fathers were
viewed more negatively than working fathers in adult samples (Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2005,
U.S. adult samples).
If a fatherhood penalty does not exist, why are fathers not taking more parental
leave? The important factor of influence seems to be whether men who think about taking
parental leave anticipate support versus barriers from their coworkers and job supervisors.
In a study of 317 Swedish fathers working at six different companies, Haas, Allard, and
Hwang (2002) found that perceived support from top managers and especially coworkers
predicted whether and how long men took parental leave. An online survey of 1,290 fathers
in Germany revealed that expectations of career barriers were negatively associated with
parental leave (Vogt & Pull, 2010). Is there reason to assume that men who take parental
leave will be judged negatively, especially in the working world?
7
Social Role Theory and Backlash Theory in the Context of Men’s Parental Leave
Social Role Theory and Backlash Theory can be applied to predict possible
consequences for men who take parental leave. Social Role Theory (Eagly, 1987; Eagly &
Wood, 2012) postulates that social roles affect our behaviors, our characteristics, and our
beliefs about the behaviors and characteristics of others. If people fulfil a role, this role
information is used to estimate traits that match the role (Deaux & Lewis, 1984, U.S. student
samples). In general, women are regarded as more communal than men because they more
often have a domestic role and care for (young) children; men are regarded as more agentic
because they have higher probabilities of working outside the home and for being in
leadership positions (Eagly & Steffen, 1984, U.S. student and adult samples).
There is broad empirical evidence that role information significantly influences
attributions of a person’s agency and communion, and this is true irrespective of the gender
of the person fulfilling the role, as was shown in samples of U.S. adults (Bosak, Sczesny, &
Eagly, 2008; Eagly & Wood, 2012). Similarly, in German student samples, participants
perceive employees who have jobs that require high qualifications to be masculine and to
have agentic characteristics (Sczesny, 2003; Sczesny, Spreemann, & Stahlberg, 2006).
Social Role Theory predicts that men who deliberately take parental leave will be
evaluated as less agentic and more communal than men who continue to work after the
birth of a child. On the one hand, fathers who take parental leave are expected to take on a
domestic role and care for young children. To fulfil this role, communal characteristics are
needed, so men who take parental leave should be rated higher on these characteristics. On
the other hand, fathers who do not take parental leave are expected to place a higher value
on their work role, so these men should be evaluated as more agentic (Bosak et al., 2008;
Eagly & Wood, 2012). The evaluation of men who take different lengths of parental leave
8
should also vary. Men who take a long parental leave (12 months) will be depicted as
embracing the domestic role for a longer period of time, and men who take a short parental
leave (2 months) will be depicted as embracing the working role for a longer period.
Therefore, men who take a short leave should be described as more agentic and less
communal than men who take a long parental leave.
The term backlash was coined by Rudman (1998) to refer to social and economic
sanctions for counterstereotypical behavior and was primarily studied with respect to
reactions to women’s behavior. Recently, some studies have also demonstrated backlash in
U.S. student samples toward men who “break the gender rules” (Moss-Racusin, Phelan, &
Rudman, 2010, p. 1): Supporting the status-incongruity hypothesis, one experimental study
revealed that modest men encountered prejudice (Moss-Racusin et al., 2010); another
experimental study found that men who were successful in a counterstereotypical job were
respected less and rated as ineffectual (Heilman & Wallen, 2010).
Taking parental leave might be considered counterstereotypical behavior for men in
Germany as it is still mostly done by women (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2014). Therefore,
taking parental leave should result in backlash. As backlash for men and women differs,
typical backlash for men in a working setting should include less respect and being seen as
less competent. Furthermore, both men and women who act in gender-counterstereotypical
ways are preferred less as bosses, and this should lower their probability of being hired
(Heilman & Wallen, 2010). However, these effects should be found only when stereotypes
are violated, and this should occur only for a long parental leave (e.g., 12 months). Increasing
numbers of men in Germany currently take short parental leaves of 2 months (Statistisches
Bundesamt, 2012a). As stereotypes are dynamic (Diekman & Eagly, 2000, U.S. student and
9
working adult samples), a short parental leave cannot be viewed as violating the male
stereotype anymore and should not elicit backlash.
How are men who take parental leave evaluated in the working world? In the US,
several experimental studies, all with (undergraduate) students as participants, have
investigated the effects of parental leave on evaluations of men. A case vignette study found
that a short parental leave of 3 months taken by a high-performing man did not lead to
negative effects on such a man’s perceived organizational commitment or organizational
rewards (Allen, Russell, & Rush, 1994). However, the same authors stated that men who
took a rather long parental leave (6 months) were perceived as less committed to work and
to the organization; they also received fewer recommendations for rewards (Allen & Russell,
1999). In a study examining organizational citizenship behavior, fathers (but not mothers)
who had taken 12 weeks of parental leave were assessed as less altruistic at work. They
were also rated as generally less compliant, but only by men (Wayne & Cordeiro, 2003).
Another study discovered that men who took a 12-week parental leave were expected to be
less successful but warmer than men who continued working (Coleman & Franiuk, 2011). A
recent study that investigated perceptions of men who had taken a 12-week leave to care
for a sick child indicated that they were rated higher on feminine traits and lower on
masculine traits (Rudman & Mescher, 2013).
Altogether, the results of these studies indicate that there might be backlash effects
and altered judgments of agency and communion toward men who have taken parental
leave, especially when the length of the leave was quite long. Furthermore, men are usually
evaluated as less warm (and less likeable) than women in Germany (Asbrock, 2010).
However, men who took parental leave were rated as warmer than men who did not in a
10
U.S. study (Coleman & Franiuk, 2011). Therefore, men who take parental leave may be
assessed as more likeable than men who do not.
There has been some research on the effects of men’s parental leave. However, prior
studies did not compare the effects of different lengths of parental leave but usually
contrasted taking a parental leave against working or staying at home (Coleman & Franiuk,
2011, U.S. student sample). When different lengths of parental leave were used, it was not
within one study, and the results were contradictory (Allen & Russell, 1999; Allen et al.,
1994, U.S. student samples). Another limitation of existing research is the fact that all of the
studies cited above were conducted in the US, a country in which no paid parental leave is
offered at all. It is likely that evaluations of men in other countries that offer and promote
opportunities for men to take parental leave would be different.
Gender Roles and Gendered Division of Labor in Germany
In Germany, there has been a traditional division of labor up to and even after the
end of the 20th century. Women are still mostly responsible for raising children, and men are
still mostly responsible for working (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2003, 2010, 2014). For
example, whereas the majority of men worked full time (80.4%) in 2006, the situation was
completely different for women (43.7% full time, 32.6% part time). This can be explained by
the fact that many—even highly qualified—women interrupt or reduce their work to part
time after they start a family and is backed up by the large numbers of women who take
parental leave (96% for 2007 to 2010, Statistisches Bundesamt, 2010, 2012a). In 2010,
Germany’s ratio of women who worked part time was considerably above the EU average of
30.8% (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2012b). Time budget studies, which analyze the allocation
of time on a daily basis, revealed that men spent more time on paid work, whereas women
were more involved in domestic work and child care (Statistisches Bundesamt, 2003).
11
In Germany, men also have a much lower probability of interrupting their careers for
family reasons. In a 15-year longitudinal study of German physicians, Evers and Sieverding
(2014) found that men interrupted their careers for much shorter lengths of time than
women, and career interruptions were negatively related to career success in both genders.
Furthermore, they discovered that children predicted career interruptions differently for
women and men. For women, more children led to longer career interruptions, but
interestingly, for men, more children resulted in shorter interruptions.
In accordance with Social Role Theory (Eagly, 1987), men are perceived as more
agentic than women, and women are perceived as more communal than men in Germany
(Steinmetz, Bosak, Sczesny, & Eagly, 2014, German and Japanese student samples).
Therefore, as the division of labor between parents and gender stereotypes are still quite
traditional in Germany, we expected that a man who deliberately takes parental leave will
be judged as more communal and less agentic and will be faced with backlash effects.
Goals of the Present Research
Our research applied Social Role Theory and Backlash Theory to the explanation of
reactions toward men who have taken parental leave. Two experimental studies were
conducted in Germany, where a new law was introduced in 2007 with the explicit goal of
increasing the number of fathers taking parental leave. The current research makes several
novel contributions to previous research. First, most studies that investigated psychological
reactions toward men who take parental leave were conducted in the US, a country whose
laws do not support men’s parental leave. Our research was conducted in Germany, which
has a new law that explicitly aims to increase the number of men taking parental leave. At
the same time, it is a country in which a quite traditional division of labor between parents
by gender is still dominant. Second, our research applied Social Role Theory and Backlash
12
Theory to make theory-driven predictions about the consequences of parental leave on
evaluations of men. Third, it systematically varied the length of parental leave and therefore
made it possible for us to investigate whether it is the parental leave per se that influences
the evaluation of men or whether the length of the parental leave matters.
Hypotheses. Our first hypothesis addressed the consequences of (the length of)
parental leave on the attribution of communal and agentic characteristics. When fathers
take parental leave and care for a child, Social Role Theory predicts that they will be
regarded as higher in communion and lower in agency than fathers who continue working.
The length of parental leave (and therefore the fulfilment of the role of the principal person
caring for the child) was expected to have an impact on the attribution of communal and
agentic attributes as well. Fathers who take a long parental leave should be regarded as
more communal and less agentic than fathers who take only the 2 partner months because
people might interpret such a long and uncommon parental leave as a deliberate and
voluntary decision that is driven by underlying traits.
Hypothesis 1 (Effects of parental leave on the ascription of communal and agentic
traits): Men who take parental leave will be viewed as less agentic and more communal than
men who do not take parental leave (1a). Men who take a long parental leave (12 months)
will be viewed as less agentic and more communal than men who take a short parental leave
(2 months; 1b).
The second hypothesis addressed the likeability of men who have taken a parental
leave. In Germany, men are generally viewed as less warm (and hence, less likeable) than
women (Asbrock, 2010, student sample). However, using U.S. student and adult samples,
both Cuddy et al. (2004) and Peplau and Fingerhut (2004) found that fathers were evaluated
as warmer than men without children; furthermore, fathers who took parental leave were
13
perceived as warmer than working fathers who did not take parental leave (Coleman &
Franiuk, 2011, U.S. student samples). Therefore, we expected that men who took a parental
leave would be liked more than men who did not take a parental leave.
Hypothesis 2 (Effects of parental leave on likeability ratings): Men who take parental
leave (regardless of its length) will be liked more than men who do not take parental leave.
Our third hypothesis addressed possible backlash effects. Taking a parental leave can
still be regarded as counterstereotypical behavior for men and can therefore lead to
backlash effects. Men could be rated as deserving less respect, as less competent, and as
less likely to be hired. In Germany, as the 2 partner months were introduced by the new law,
an increasing number of fathers take advantage of these partner months, but only a minority
of less than 2% take a longer parental leave of up to 12 months. As backlash depends on the
violation of gender stereotypes (Rudman & Glick, 1999, U.S. student sample), and gender
stereotypes are dynamic (Diekman & Eagly, 2000, U.S. student and working adult samples),
we expected to find that backlash effects would be directed only toward men who took a
long parental leave.
Hypothesis 3 (Backlash effects of parental leave): Backlash effects will be directed
toward men who take a long parental leave (12 months) but not toward men who take a
short parental leave (2 months) or no parental leave.
Hypothesis 3a: Men who take a long parental leave (12 months) will be respected less
and rated as less competent than men who take no leave or who take a short
parental leave (2 months).
Hypothesis 3b: Men who take a long parental leave (12 months) will receive lower
probability ratings for being hired than men who take no leave or who take a short
parental leave (2 months).
14
Gender effects. We had no basis for making a prediction about potential gender
differences in the evaluation of men who take parental leave. Several studies found gender
differences (e.g, Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992, meta-analysis; Rudman, 1998, German
and U.S. student samples; Sczesny & Kühnen, 2004) but not always in the same direction;
whereas others did not (Rudman & Glick, 1999; Sczesny et al., 2006, German and U.S.
student samples). Therefore, we included participants’ gender in an exploratory analysis to
determine whether there were any gender effects.
Study 1
Study 1 investigated how people evaluate a man who takes parental leave. First,
students in business-related subjects read a job advertisement for a leadership position.
Then they examined a vignette describing an applicant who provided a good fit to the job;
only the length of parental leave differed across conditions. Finally, participants evaluated
the applicant’s communion, agency, and competence. They also rated how much the
applicant would be liked and respected and how likely the applicant would be to get the job.
On the one hand, we hypothesized that parental leave would have a positive effect on the
evaluations of communion and likeability. On the other hand, we predicted that parental
leave would lead to lower agency, respect, competence, and hiring probability ratings when
the parental leave was long (12 months).
Method
In front of a business-studies library, students studying business-related subjects
(e.g., business studies, economics, business law) were approached by a female advanced
student (A.F.). The business students were asked whether they would like to participate in a
psychological study and were told a cover story that it was about the evaluation and
selection of people under time pressure. Students were offered sweets as compensation.
15
After agreeing to participate, students were led to a table in the room next to the library
where they were presented with the vignette about the applicant and the questionnaire.
Participants. Ninety students (50 women, 40 men) from a large German university
and a Duale Hochschule (a part-time university that cooperates with companies in training
students) participated. Students’ mean age was M = 22.27 years (SD = 2.47, Range: 18 – 28).
All participants studied business-related subjects (business studies 57.8%, business and
economics education 11.2%, economics 6.7%, other business related subjects 23.6%) and
had been attending the university for a mean number of semesters of M = 5.46 (SD = 2.82,
Range: 2 – 12). Each group of 30 participants received different parental leave information.
Demographic characteristics, separated by gender and condition, can be found in Table 1.
Material. The material consisted of a job advertisement, a fictitious application, and a
questionnaire that measured the dependent variables. A real job advertisement for a
manager position with excellent career opportunities was shortened and made anonymous.
A cover letter and curriculum vitae constituted the job application, which was constructed to
provide a good fit with the job requirements. The applicant was described as having a
diploma in business studies with a very good final grade from a prestigious university,
several years of work experience as a recruitment consultant, and as speaking three
languages. All in all, the applicant was described as very qualified for the advertised job.
Length of parental leave was manipulated in the curriculum vitae and in the cover letter (see
the Appendix for the original German wording of the scenarios).
Procedure. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the conditions. First, they
read the job advertisement and the fictitious application. They then filled out the
questionnaire, which included the dependent variables. The instructions were as follows:
“Please imagine that in your company, you are responsible for hiring a person for the
16
advertised job.” The whole procedure took about 10 min, after which the participants were
thanked and debriefed.
Manipulation check. Two questions “Did the applicant take a parental leave?” (yes
vs. no) and “If yes, how long was the parental leave?” were used as a manipulation check.
Dependent variables. The dependent variables included ratings of communion,
agency, likeability, respect, competence, and hiring probability. The original German wording
of the scales or the respective publications can be found in the Appendix.
Communion and agency. The femininity and masculinity scales from an adapted
German version of the Short Form of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Zimmermann, Sieverding,
& Müller, 2011) were used to assess communion and agency. The femininity scale
(Cronbach’s α = .91) included eight items such as “gentle” and “compassionate”; the
masculinity scale (Cronbach’s α = .83) included eight items such as “independent” and
“dominant.” Participants assessed how well each attribute described the applicant on a 7point scale ranging from 1 (does not apply at all) to 7 (applies very much). All femininity scale
items were averaged to form a communion rating (Cronbach’s α = .91 in Study 1, Cronbach’s
α = .89 in Study 2); all masculinity scale items were averaged to form an agency rating
(Cronbach’s α = .82 in Study 1; Cronbach’s α = .84 in Study 2).
Competence. The competence scale (Cronbach’s α = .88), which was composed of
achievement motivation, leadership motivation, and general competence, was rated on a 7point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very strongly). Questions were adapted from the
scale for describing others from the Business-Focused Inventory of Personality (BIP, Hossiep
& Paschen, 2003), for example, “The applicant wants to have a higher performance than
others” and “The applicant conveys authority.” General competence was assessed with the
17
question “How competent is the applicant?” All items were averaged to form a competence
rating (Cronbach’s α = .89 in Study 1; Cronbach’s α = .90 in Study 2).
Likeability and respect. The likeability and respect scales were each comprised of
two questions that were similar to Heilman and Wallen (2010). To assess likeability, the
participants were asked: “How likeable do you consider the applicant to be?” and “How
much would the company’s employees like the applicant?”. The questions for respect were
“How much would you/the company’s employees respect the applicant?” The participants
rated each question on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). The two
likeability items were averaged to form a likeability rating (Cronbach’s α = .80 in Study 1;
Cronbach’s α = .84 in Study 2), and the two respect items were averaged to form a respect
rating (Cronbach’s α = .88 in Study 1; Cronbach’s α = .85 in Study 2).
Hiring probability. The four questions used to assess the applicant’s probability of
being hired were similar to questions used by Bosak and Sczesny (2011) and Moss-Racusin et
al. (2010). They included “Should the applicant be short-listed/interviewed?”, “Would you
hire the applicant for the advertised position?”, and “How likely is the applicant to get the
job?” Answers were given on 7-point scales ranging from 1 (absolutely not) to 7 (absolutely).
The four questions were averaged to form a hiring probability rating (Cronbach’s α = .87 in
Study 1; Cronbach’s α = .92 in Study 2).
Results
The number of female and male participants in conditions with different lengths of
parental leave did not differ from an equal distribution, χ²(2) = 0.63, p = .730. The means for
all dependent variables and the cell sizes for each condition can be found in Table 2. A
manipulation check revealed that 92% of the participants correctly remembered whether
18
the applicant had taken a parental leave, and 74% could specify the exact length. Therefore,
we concluded that the manipulation was successful.
Analysis of data. To test for group differences, we first analyzed the dependent
variables using a 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) MANOVA,
which showed highly significant differences for parental leave condition, F(12, 160) = 6.62, p
< .001, η² = .33, and gender, F(6, 79) = 3.71, p = .003, η ² = .22. We then computed 3
(parental leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVAs for all dependent
variables.
Ascription of gender role characteristics. The communion and agency ratings are
shown in Table 2. In Hypothesis 1, we expected applicants who took a parental leave to be
rated as more communal and less agentic than applicants who did not (1a) and applicants
who took 12 months as more communal and less agentic than applicants who took 2 months
(1b). We tested these predictions with a 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’
gender) ANOVA for communion and agency, respectively. As expected in Hypothesis 1a,
parental leave had a significant effect on communion ratings, F(5, 84) = 13.39, p < .001,
partial η² = .41. Participants rated applicants who took no parental leave as less communal
than those who took 2 or 12 months of parental leave. Contrary to Hypothesis 1b,
communion ratings did not differ as a function of length of parental leave (2 vs. 12 months;
see Table 2). Hypothesis 1 was not supported for agency ratings. Parental leave did not
affect agency ratings, F(2, 84) = 0.70, p = .501. Participants’ gender did not affect the ratings
of communion, F(5, 84) = 3.91, p = .051, or agency, F (1, 84) = 0.92, p = .341.
Likeability ratings. Hypothesis 2 predicted that applicants who took a parental leave
would be liked more than applicants who did not, and we tested this with a 3 (parental
leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVA. In accordance with Hypothesis 2,
19
parental leave influenced the likeability ratings, F(5, 84) = 9.75, p < .001, partial η² = .19.
Participants thought applicants who took parental leave would be liked more than applicants
who did not take parental leave; participants did not differentiate between 2 and 12 months
of parental leave (see Table 2). Participants’ gender did not affect the likeability ratings, F(1,
84) = 2.57, p = .113.
Work-oriented ratings. Hypothesis 3a predicted that applicants who took no or 2
months of parental leave would be respected more and evaluated as more competent than
applicants who took 12 months of parental leave. We tested this prediction with 3 (parental
leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVAs on respect and competence,
respectively. Parental leave influenced the respect ratings, F(5, 84) = 5.21, p = .007, partial η²
= .11, but not always in the hypothesized direction (H3a). Applicants who took 12 months of
leave received lower respect ratings than those who took 2 months of parental leave but did
not differ from applicants who did not take any parental leave. Unexpectedly, applicants
who took 2 months of parental leave received higher respect ratings than applicants who
took no parental leave (see Table 2).
Regarding competence, Hypothesis 3a was not supported, as participants rated all
applicants as equally competent regardless of their parental leave, F(2, 84) = 0.06, p = .943.
Hypothesis 3b predicted that applicants who took 12 months of parental leave would be
rated as less likely to be hired than applicants who took 2 months or no parental leave.
Contrary to Hypothesis 3b, parental leave did not affect the hiring probability ratings, F (2,
84) = 0.56, p = .571.
Main effects of participants’ gender on the ratings of work-related characteristics
were found. In comparison with male participants, female participants expected applicants
to be respected more, F(5, 84) = 17.76, p < .001, partial η² = .18, rated the applicants as more
20
competent, F(5, 84) = 5.97, p = .017, partial η² = .07, and rated the applicant’s probability of
being hired as higher, F(5, 84) = 6.67, p = .012, partial η² = .07, regardless of (length of)
parental leave.
We repeated all analyses including only participants who could specify whether the
applicant took a parental leave. The results did not differ except for two effects of
participants’ gender: In this subsample, men rated the applicant as more communal than
women, and women thought the applicant would be liked more than men did. Because we
had no hypotheses regarding gender differences, all participants were included in the
analyses.
Discussion
In accordance with Social Role Theory (Eagly, 1987), men’s parental leave was found
to influence communion ratings; however, it did not affect agency ratings. Parental leave
also led to higher likeability ratings. Contrary to Backlash Theory, no backlash effects were
found for the ratings of respect, competence, and hiring probability, even for men who had
taken a long parental leave (12 months). Furthermore, we found differences in how men and
women evaluated the applicants on respect, competence, and hiring probability.
Is it possible that participants were too aware of the socially desirable answers and
therefore did not reveal their true beliefs? In addition, students with the same subjects as in
Study 1 rated the attractiveness and gender typicality of the advertised job in a post-hoc test
(N = 40). The advertised job turned out to be a stereotypically female job and was rather
unattractive to this particular group of students. Hence, it is possible that participants
viewed the job as appropriate for men who would take parental leave and therefore did not
exhibit backlash. Study 2 was conducted to explore these possibilities.
21
Study 2
Study 2 was a replication of Study 1 except that the job advertisement described a
stereotypically male and very attractive job. We consulted experts on employment decisionmaking from a leading university to preselect two job advertisements that are regarded as
attractive options for graduates of business-related subjects. We then administered a
pretest (N = 22) to the target group to choose the more attractive one. The job
advertisement they chose was for a leadership position in finance. To ensure that the ratings
of the applicants would not be confounded by social desirability, we applied a short six-item
version of the Social Desirability Scale-17 (SDS-17, Stöber, 1999). The hypotheses were the
same as in Study 1.
Method
Students were again approached in front of the business-studies library. They were
offered sweets for compensation and were debriefed after the study.
Procedure. The procedure for Study 2 was the same as described in Study 1.
Participants. The participants were 113 students (55 women, 58 men) from the same
German universities as in Study 1. Their mean age was M = 23.34 years (SD = 2.59, Range: 19
– 29). They were all studying business-related subjects (business studies 56.6%,
management 23.0%, economics 3.5%, other business-related subjects 16.9%) with a mean
number of semesters of M = 5.62 (SD = 3.03, Range: 1 – 12).
Material. The material in Study 2 was the same as in Study 1 with the following
exceptions. The job advertisement described a leadership position in finance and offered
performance-based pay. Hence, the job application was modified to match this job. Also, the
questionnaire included a short version of the SDS-17. We used six items that showed the
best internal reliability on a pretest (Cronbach’s α = .67), for example, “I accept all opinions,
22
even if they do not agree with my opinion” and “In an argument, I always remain factual and
objective.” Cronbach’s α for all other measures from Study 2 are reported in Study 1. The
original German scales (or the respective publications) and the original German wording of
the scenarios can be found in the Appendix.
Results
The number of female and male participants in conditions with different lengths of
parental leave did not differ from an equal distribution, χ²(2) = 0.16, p = .921. As the average
score on the SDS-17 was not correlated with any of the dependent variables (all rs < .15, ps >
.26), we concluded that social desirability did not confound the evaluations of the applicants,
and hence, we did not include the SDS-17 in further analyses. The means for all dependent
variables and the cell sizes for each condition can be found in Table 3. A manipulation check
revealed that 81% of the participants correctly indicated whether the applicant had taken a
parental leave, and 73% could specify the length. Therefore, we concluded that the
manipulation was successful.
Analysis of data. To test for group differences, we first analyzed the dependent
variables by computing a 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender)
MANOVA, which showed significant differences for condition, F(12, 204) = 1.84, p = .044, η²
= .10, but not for gender, F(6, 101) = 0.51, p = .80. We then computed 3 (parental leave: 0, 2,
12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVAs on all dependent variables.
Gender role characteristics. The communion and agency ratings are shown in Table
3. Hypothesis 1a predicted that applicants who took a parental leave would be rated as
more communal and less agentic than applicants who did not. A 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12
months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVA on communion showed that, as predicted in
Hypothesis 1a, parental leave significantly influenced the communion ratings, F(2, 107) =
23
3.46, p = .035, partial η² = .06. Participants rated applicants who did not take parental leave
as less communal than those who took 12 months of parental leave (see Table 3).
Hypothesis 1b predicted that men who took 12 months of parental leave would be
rated as more communal and less agentic than men who took 2 months. However, Tukey’s
HSD test showed that participants did not differentiate between 2 months and no parental
leave or 2 months and 12 months. Contrary to Hypothesis 1, a 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12
months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVA on agency showed that parental leave did not
affect the agency ratings, F(2, 107) = 1.55, p = .216. There were no main effects of
participants’ gender on the ratings of communion, F(1, 107) = 0.42, p = .514, or agency, F(1,
107) = 0.72, p = .399.
Likeability ratings. Hypothesis 2 predicted that applicants who took a parental leave
would be liked more than applicants who did not. A 3 (parental leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2
(participants’ gender) ANOVA on liking found that participants expected applicants to be
liked differently according to length of parental leave, F(2, 106) = 4.66, p = .012, partial η² =
.08. Participants rated applicants who took parental leave higher on likeability than
applicants who did not, regardless of the length of parental leave (see Table 3). Participants’
gender did not play a role in the likeability ratings, F(1, 106) = 0.59, p = .443.
Work-related characteristics. Hypothesis 3 predicted that men who took 12 months
of parental leave would be respected less, rated as less competent, and would be less likely
to be hired than men who took 2 months or no parental leave. We computed 3 (parental
leave: 0, 2, 12 months) x 2 (participants’ gender) ANOVAs on respect, competence, and
hiring probability, respectively. The results revealed that contrary to Hypothesis 3, parental
leave did not affect the respect, F(2, 106) < 0.01, p = .996, competence, F(2, 107) = 1.21, p =
.302, or hiring probability, F (2, 106) = 0.78, p = .462, ratings. Participants’ gender also did
24
not influence the respect, F(1, 106) = 1.78, p = .185, competence, F(2, 107) = 0.55, p = .460,
or hiring probability, F (1, 106) = 2.01, p = .159, ratings.
We repeated all analyses including only participants who specified correctly whether
the applicant had taken a parental leave. The only differences were that, in this subsample,
parental leave influenced communion only marginally significantly and participants liked
applicants who took 2 months of parental leave more than they liked applicants who did not
take parental leave. Therefore, we kept all participants in our analysis.
Discussion
Study 2 replicated most of the findings from Study 1. It used a very attractive job
description to ensure that participants would be interested in the advertised job. It also
controlled for social desirability, which did not influence the ratings. With regard to gender
role characteristics, the predictions made by Social Role Theory (Eagly, 1987) were partly
supported. Participants judged applicants who took a longer parental leave as more
communal, but they did not evaluate them as less agentic. They also gave applicants who
took a parental leave higher likeability ratings than applicants who did not, regardless of
length of parental leave. Regarding work-related characteristics, backlash effects were not
found. Irrespective of parental leave (length), participants respected applicants equally,
found them similarly competent, and predicted the same hiring probability.
General Discussion
In two experimental studies, we investigated people’s perceptions of a male
applicant as a function of an alleged (length of) parental leave. Overall, we did not find
negative reactions toward men who took parental leave. By contrast, we found a very
positive evaluation of such men. Participants rated men who took a parental leave as more
communal and also rated them as more likeable. All applicants were rated as equally
25
agentic and competent, were respected similarly, and received similar hiring probabilities.
The only exception was that applicants who took 2 months of parental leave were given
higher respect ratings than applicants who took no or 12 months of parental leave in Study
1. We will first discuss the results, then consider the limitations and strengths of our studies,
and finally discuss the implications.
Evaluations of Male Applicants as a Function of Their Parental Leave
As predicted by Social Role Theory (Eagly, 1987), men who took a (longer) parental
leave were seen as significantly more communal. This finding is in line with findings in U.S.
student samples by Rudman and Mescher (2013) who discovered that men who had taken a
leave to care for a sick child were rated higher on communal traits. The effect sizes for
communion varied between Studies 1 and 2 (η² = .41 in Study 1 vs. η² = .07 in Study 2). It is
possible that in Study 1, the effect size was larger because not only had the applicant taken a
parental leave, but he had also applied for a stereotypically female job. Both pieces of
information together may have reinforced the idea that the communal characteristics of the
applicant were due to a stable trait instead of the situation.
What is interesting is that applicants who took parental leave were not seen as
significantly less agentic. Here, our results differ from Rudman and Mescher (2013): Whereas
they found that sick-care leave led to lower ratings of agentic traits, we found that taking
parental leave (regardless of length) did not affect ratings of agency. It is important to
consider that in our studies, all men were applying for a job that required high qualifications
and were described as highly qualified in their curriculum vitae. Describing a person as an
employee has been found to induce higher agency judgments (Bosak et al., 2008, U.S. adult
sample); hence, it seems that the fact that the men were applying for a job that required
26
high qualifications influenced participants’ agency ratings more than whether the applicant
had taken parental leave.
Participants expected applicants who took a parental leave to be liked more than
applicants who did not take a parental leave, regardless of length. These results are in
agreement with several studies on student samples in the US that showed that fathers are
perceived as warmer than childless men (Cuddy et al., 2004; Peplau & Fingerhut, 2004) and
fathers who take a parental leave are perceived as warmer than fathers who do not take a
leave (Coleman & Franiuk, 2011).
Participants thought all applicants would be respected equally. Maybe participants
did not differ in their respect for applicants because they rated all applicants as equally
agentic, and agentic characteristics are linked with being respected (Wojciszke, Abele, &
Baryla, 2009, diverse Polish samples). In our research, we found correlations between
agency and respect of r = .46 and r = .48 (both ps < .001) in Studies 1 and 2, respectively. An
exception was that in Study 1, applicants who took 2 months of parental leave received the
highest respect ratings. This may be explained by the fact that taking 2 months of parental
leave is now (since the introduction of the new law) a clever thing to do in Germany, given
that the months for which the parental allowance is paid are lost if not taken by fathers.
However, this result was not replicated in Study 2.
What is striking is that backlash against men who had taken 12 months of parental
leave was not found with respect to the ratings of competence and hiring probability. This is
partly in line with results from U.S. student samples by Coleman and Franiuk (2011) who
found that competence ratings did not differ between fathers who did not take and fathers
who took a parental leave and that such ratings were lower only for fathers who planned to
stay home until their child went to school. However, they also found that fathers who took
27
parental leave were considered less successful, which is in contrast to our finding that they
were not given lower hiring probability ratings. Our results are thus more similar to studies
that have compared men and women with and without children. Several studies in the US
found negative effects for mothers but not for fathers (e.g. Correll et al., 2007; Cuddy et al.,
2004; Heilman & Okimoto, 2008; Peplau & Fingerhut, 2004, U.S. working adults and student
samples).
Other studies conducted in the US found results that suggested backlash for men
who took parental leave (Allen & Russell, 1999, U.S. student samples; Coleman & Franiuk,
2011; Wayne & Cordeiro, 2003), but our studies, which were conducted in Germany, did not
identify any indication of this. It is probable that one cause lies in Germany’s completely
different legislation concerning parental leave (see Introduction). The new parental leave
law in Germany has been in place since 2007, and gender roles and stereotypes are dynamic
aspects of culture (Diekman & Eagly, 2000, U.S. working adult and student samples). The
gender roles of men may have already changed—at least slightly—to incorporate taking a
parental leave. This would make it a normal and not a counterstereotypical act for men, and
hence would not elicit backlash. Furthermore, our fictitious applicant was highly qualified,
which may have been more important than whether or not he took parental leave. Allen et
al. (1994) also did not find negative reactions to high-performing employees who took
parental leave in a U.S. student sample.
The lack of backlash for hiring can also be discussed with respect to the Lack of Fit
Model (Heilman, 1983). The Lack of Fit Model postulates that expectations about the success
of an individual in a certain job depend on the fit between the perceived attributes of the
individual and the perceived job requirements. A good fit leads to expectations of success
and a high probability of being hired, whereas a poor fit results in expectations of failure and
28
a low probability of being hired. Our job advertisements, especially the male-typed job in
Study 2, required applicants to be agentic and competent. Our results indicate that
applicants who took a parental leave were not perceived as less agentic or less competent
(similar to Cuddy et al., 2004; Heilman & Okimoto, 2008; and Peplau & Fingerhut, 2004, who
found that fathers were perceived as equally or more competent than childless men in U.S.
working adults and students samples); instead, they gained communion and likeability.
Therefore, applicants who took parental leave still had a good fit with the advertised job and
were accordingly rated as having a high probability of being hired.
Limitations and Strengths
Using a student sample clearly needs to be named as a limitation as we cannot
generalize from such a specific sample (young, high education, on average higher
socioeconomic background than an average German, e.g. Middendorff, Apolinarski,
Poskowsky, Kandulla, & Netz, 2013) to the whole population. It is probable that results
would have been different in a real-world situation. For example, we used only an
application with a cover letter and curriculum vitae. Hence, we cannot guarantee that the
results would have been the same with a real application, which consists of more details, or
even in a job interview.
Even though our participants were all students in business-related subjects, they still
lack experience in hiring situations. Also, we asked participants about a fictitious situation to
which they could respond freely on the basis of their views instead of having to take
responsibility for the consequences. Furthermore, it might be the case that students are
more open to new developments than people who have been on the job for several years. It
is also possible that cohort effects exist here, as stereotypes are dynamic and may have
changed in line with changing roles (Diekman & Eagly, 2000; in U.S. student and working
29
adult samples). For example, using student samples in the US and student and working adult
samples in Germany, Wilde and Diekman (2005) found that participants perceived a trend in
which women and men were becoming more similar from the past to the present and into
the future. However, as the study was conducted before men began to take parental leave in
higher numbers in Germany, the development was mainly based on women acquiring more
masculine characteristics.
Prior studies that have investigated the perceptions of men who take parental leave
have also used student participants (Allen & Russell, 1999; Allen et al., 1994; Coleman &
Franiuk, 2011; Rudman & Mescher, 2013; Wayne & Cordeiro, 2003, U.S. student samples);
therefore, our results can be compared to their findings. However, it would be more
interesting to study what people in leadership positions would do in a similar situation.
All our applicants had already taken their parental leave so that participants could
reason that the applicant would not burden the firm with further absences. However, we did
not expect that a parental leave would lead to a rational decision to give the applicant a bad
rating. Rather, we were searching for backlash effects, that is, whether the applicant would
be sanctioned for implementing actions that were inconsistent with gender stereotypes.
Moss-Racusin et al. (2010) explain that backlash occurs when people violate gender
stereotypes that justify the gender hierarchy, thus endangering the status quo. Therefore,
backlash effects should be independent of whether the action had occurred in the past or
would affect the present. However, men taking a parental leave could also encounter
rational negative responses.
Previous studies have compared parents who took a parental leave with parents who
continued to work or with stay-at-home parents (e.g., Coleman & Franiuk, 2011; Wayne &
Cordeiro, 2003, U.S. student samples). Because we had three conditions, two of them with
30
different lengths of parental leave (2 vs. 12 months), we were able to examine whether
taking any kind of parental leave caused an effect or whether the leave had to be of a certain
length. In contrast to findings by Allen et al. (1994) and Allen and Russell (1999) with U.S.
student samples, it was the act of taking a parental leave that affected the ratings of both
communion and likeability, whereas length did not influence the ratings.
We also used two different job advertisements from different areas of work
(recruitment and finance), and the second advertisement was chosen specifically to ensure it
was a male-typed job that was attractive to our target group. Nevertheless, Study 2
replicated the results from Study 1 except for a lack of gender differences. Furthermore, we
used a short version of the SDS-17 (Stöber, 1999) to ensure that evaluations were not driven
by social desirability and were able to establish that participants’ answers were independent
of their desire to provide socially desirable answers.
Implications
The proportion of men in Germany taking parental leave has increased substantially
since the Federal Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act was introduced in 2007 (see
Introduction). Our studies indicate that in Germany today, men might not need to worry
when taking a parental leave—especially when it is short—because we found some evidence
for positive attitudes toward men’s parental leave. By reserving 2 months only for fathers,
the new law has already drastically increased the number of fathers who take a parental
leave. This trend parallels the one in Scandinavia, where legislation reserved parental leave
time for fathers as early as 1993 in Norway and 1995 in Sweden. In the year after the law
was introduced in these countries, the number of fathers taking a parental leave began to
rise and has not stopped since (Haas & Rostgaard, 2011). This rise, in turn, may have altered
31
the perception of men taking a parental leave because we did not find any negative effects
of parental leave.
Altogether, our research could not replicate any of the backlash effects that were
found in U.S. studies. In Germany, legislation encourages men to take parental leave, and
thus, many more men have begun to take advantage of this opportunity since the respective
law was introduced (see Introduction). Our research shows some evidence that men who
take parental leave are viewed more positively in Germany than in countries that do not
have such legislation such as the US—at least among students. Therefore, when trying to get
fathers more involved with their children, it is important to consider legislative and
economic factors as well as psychological ones.
32
References
Allen, T. D., & Russell, J. E. A. (1999). Parental leave of absence: Some not so family-friendly
implications. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 166-191. doi: 10.1111/j.15591816.1999.tb01380.x
Allen, T. D., Russell, J. E. A., & Rush, M. C. (1994). The effects of gender and leave of absence
on attributions for high performance, perceived organizational commitment, and
allocation of organizational rewards. Sex Roles, 31, 443-464. doi:
10.1007/BF01544200
Asbrock, F. (2010). Stereotypes of social groups in Germany in terms of warmth and
competence. Social Psychology, 41, 76-81. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000011
BMFSFJ. (2013). Bundeselterngeld- und Elternzeitgesetz [Federal Parental Allowance and
Parental Leave Act]. Retrieved from
http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/gesetze,did=93110.html.
Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Gender bias in leader selection? Evidence from a hiring
simulation study. Sex Roles, 65, 234-242. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0012-7
Bosak, J., Sczesny, S., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Communion and agency judgments of women
and men as a function of role information and response format. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 38, 1148-1155. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.538
Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2005). Attitudes toward traditional and nontraditional
parents. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 436-445. doi: 10.1111/j.14716402.2005.00244.x
Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. (2006). Bundeselterngeld- und
Elternzeitgesetz [Federal Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act]. Retrieved from
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bundesrecht/beeg/gesamt.pdf.
33
Burgess, A. (2011). ‘Family man’: British fathers' journey to the centre of the kitchen.
Retrieved from http://www.fatherhoodinstitute.org/2011/fathers-attitudes-towardsand-experiences-of-parental-leave/
Coleman, J. M., & Franiuk, R. (2011). Perceptions of mothers and fathers who take
temporary work leave. Sex Roles, 64, 311-323. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9918-8
Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007). Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?
American Journal of Sociology, 112, 1297-1338. doi: 10.1086/511799
Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth
doesn't cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 701-718. doi: 10.1111/j.00224537.2004.00381.x
Deaux, K., & Lewis, L. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among
components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 9911004. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991
Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men
of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 11711188. doi: 10.1177/0146167200262001
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: a social-role interpretation (Vol. 1985).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders:
A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.3
Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women
and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735-754.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735
34
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski &
E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 458-476).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
Ehlert, N., & Rüling, A. (2008). Dossier Elterngeld als Teil einer nachhaltigen Familienpolitik
[Dossier parental allowance as part of a sustainable family policy]. Berlin:
Bundesministerium für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend. Retrieved from
http://www.bmfsfj.de/RedaktionBMFSFJ/Broschuerenstelle/Pdf-Anlagen/DossierElterngeld,property=pdf,bereich=bmfsfj,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf.
Evers, A., & Sieverding, M. (2014). Why do highly qualified women (still) earn less? Gender
differences in long-term predictors of career success. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 38, 93-106. doi: 10.1177/0361684313498071
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, Public Law 103-3 (1993). Retrieved from
http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/statutes/fmla.htm.
forsa Gesellschaft für Sozialforschung und statistische Analysen mbH. (2013). Meinungen
und Einstellungen der Väter in Deutschland [Opinions and attitudes of fathers in
Germany]. Berlin: Gruner und Jahr AG & Co KG Retrieved from
http://www.eltern.de/c/images/pdf/Ergebnisbericht_Vaeterumfrage_2013.pdf.
Haas, L., Allard, K., & Hwang, P. (2002). The impact of organizational culture on men's use of
parental leave in Sweden. Community, Work & Family, 5, 319-342. doi:
10.1080/1366880022000041801
Haas, L., & Rostgaard, T. (2011). Fathers' rights to paid parental leave in the Nordic
countries: Consequences for the gendered division of leave. Community, Work &
Family, 14, 177-195. doi: 10.1080/13668803.2011.571398
35
Han, W.-J., Ruhm, C., & Waldfogel, J. (2009). Parental leave policies and parents'
employment and leave-taking. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28, 29-54.
doi: 10.1002/pam.20398
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The Lack of Fit model. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 5, 269-298.
Heilman, M. E., & Okimoto, T. G. (2008). Motherhood: A potential source of bias in
employment decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 189-198. doi:
10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.189
Heilman, M. E., & Wallen, A. S. (2010). Wimpy and undeserving of respect: Penalties for
men’s gender-inconsistent success. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46,
664-667. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2010.01.008
Hossiep, R., & Paschen, M. (2003). Das Bochumer Inventar zur berufsbezogenen
Persönlichkeitsbeschreibung [Business-Focused Inventory of Personality (BIP)]. (2.
ed.). Göttingen; Bern: Hogrefe, Verl. für Psychologie.
Kapella, O., & Rille-Pfeiffer, C. (2007). Einstellungen und Werthaltungen zu Themen der
Vereinbarkeit von Familie und Erwerb [Attitudes and value systems about issues of
reconcilability of family and earning]. ÖIF Paper Nr. 66, 1-64.
Kaufman, G., Lyonette, C., & Crompton, R. (2010). Post-birth employment leave among
fathers in Britain and the United States. Fathering, 8, 321-340. doi:
10.3149/fth.0803.321
Lammi-Taskula, J. (2008). Doing fatherhood: Understanding the gendered use of parental
leave in Finland. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, & Practice about Men as
Fathers, 6, 133-148. doi: 10.3149/fth.0602.133
36
Middendorff, E., Apolinarski, B., Poskowsky, J., Kandulla, M., & Netz, N. (2013). Die
wirtschaftliche und soziale Lage der Studierenden in Deutschland 2012. [The
economic and social situation of students in Germany 2012]. Berlin:
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung Retrieved from
http://www.sozialerhebung.de/download/20/soz20_hauptbericht_gesamt.pdf.
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Rudman, L. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules:
Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psychology of Men &
Masculinity, 11, 140-151. doi: 10.1037/a0018093
Nepomnyaschy, L., & Waldfogel, J. (2007). Paternity leave and fathers' involvement with
their young children: Evidence from the American ECLS-B. Community, Work &
Family, 10, 427-453. doi: 10.1080/13668800701575077
Peplau, L. A., & Fingerhut, A. (2004). The paradox of the lesbian worker. Journal of Social
Issues, 60, 719-735. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00382.x
Reich, N. (2010). Who cares? Determinants of the fathers‘ use of parental leave in Germany.
HWWI Research Paper, 1-31.
Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of
counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74, 629-645. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629
Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic
women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004-1010. doi: 10.1037/00223514.77.5.1004
37
Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility
stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues, 69, 322-340. doi:
10.1111/josi.12017
Sczesny, S. (2003). A closer look beneath the surface: Various facets of the think-managerthink-male stereotype. Sex Roles, 49, 353-363. doi: 10.1023/a:1025112204526
Sczesny, S., & Kühnen, U. (2004). Meta-cognition about biological sex and gender-stereotypic
physical appearance: Consequences for the assessment of leadership competence.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 13-21. doi:
10.1177/0146167203258831
Sczesny, S., Spreemann, S., & Stahlberg, D. (2006). Masculine = competent? Physical
appearance and sex as sources of gender-stereotypic attributions. Swiss Journal of
Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Revue Suisse de Psychologie,
65, 15-23. doi: 10.1024/1421-0185.65.1.15
Seward, R. R., Yeatts, D. E., & Zottarelli, L. K. (2002). Parental leave and father involvement in
child care: Sweden and the United States. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 33,
387-399.
Statistics Sweden. (2012). Women and men in Sweden - facts and figures 2012. Örebro:
Statistics Sweden Retrieved from
http://www.scb.se/statistik/_publikationer/LE0201_2012A01_BR_X10BR1201ENG.pd
f.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2003). Wo bleibt die Zeit? Die Zeitverwendung der Bevölkerung in
Deutschland 2001/02 [Where has the time gone? The time use of the population in
Germany 2001/02]. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved from
38
http://www.bmfsfj.de/RedaktionBMFSFJ/Abteilung2/Pdf-Anlagen/wo-bleibtzeit,property=pdf.pdf.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2010). Verdienstunterschiede zwischen Männern und Frauen 2006
[Income differences between men and women in 2006]. Wiesbaden: Retrieved from
https://www.destatis.de/DE/Publikationen/Thematisch/VerdiensteArbeitskosten/Ve
rdienstunterschiede/VerdienstunterschiedeMannFrau5621001069004.pdf?__blob=p
ublicationFile.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2012a). Pressekonferenz „Elterngeld – wer, wie lange und wie
viel?“ [Press conference "Parental allowance - who, how long and how much?"].
Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved from
https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Soziales/Sozialleistunge
n/Elterngeld/Tabellen/GeburtenGeschlechtJahr2010.html.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2012b). Teilzeitquote von Frauen in Deutschland deutlich über EUDurchschnitt [press release] [Women's ratio of part-time work considerably above EUaverage]. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt Retrieved from
https://www.destatis.de/DE/PresseService/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2012/03/PD1
2_078_132pdf.pdf?__blob=publicationFile.
Statistisches Bundesamt. (2014). Statistik zum Elterngeld: Beendete Leistungsbezüge für im
Jahr 2012 geborene Kinder [Statistics about parental allowance: Terminated benefits
for children born in 2012]. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. Retrieved from
https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Soziales/Sozialleistunge
n/Elterngeld/Tabellen/GeburtenGeschlechtJahr2010.html.
39
Steinmetz, J., Bosak, J., Sczesny, S., & Eagly, A. H. (2014). Social role effects on gender
stereotyping in Germany and Japan. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 52-60.
doi: 10.1111/ajsp.12044
Stöber, J. (1999). Die Soziale-Erwünschtheits-Skala-17 (SES-17): Entwicklung und erste
Befunde zu Reliabilität und Validität [The Social Desirability Scale-17 (SDS-17):
Development and first results on reliability and validity]. Diagnostica, 45, 173-177.
doi: 10.1026//0012-1924.45.4.173
Väter gGmbH. (2012). Trendstudie „Moderne Väter“ [Trend study "modern fathers"].
Hamburg: Behörde für Arbeit, Soziales, Familie und Integration Hamburg Retrieved
from http://vaeter-ggmbh.de/wpcontent/uploads/2012/12/Trendstudie_Vaeter_gGmbH_Download.pdf.
Vogt, A.-C., & Pull, K. (2010). Warum Väter ihre Erwerbstätigkeit (nicht) unterbrechen:
Mikroökonomische versus in der Persönlichkeit des Vaters begründete
Determinanten der Inanspruchnahme von Elternzeit durch Väter [Why fathers (don’t)
take parental leave. Microeconomic vs. personality based determinants]. Zeitschrift
für Personalforschung, 24, 48-68.
Wayne, J. H., & Cordeiro, B. L. (2003). Who is a good organizational citizen? Social perception
of male and female employees who use family leave. Sex Roles, 49, 233-246. doi:
10.1023/a:1024600323316
Wilde, A., & Diekman, A. B. (2005). Cross-Cultural Similarities And Differences In Dynamic
Stereotypes: A Comparison Between Germany And The United States. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 29, 188-196.
40
Wojciszke, B., Abele, A. E., & Baryla, W. (2009). Two dimensions of interpersonal attitudes:
Liking depends on communion, respect depends on agency. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 39, 973-990. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.595
Zimmermann, F., Sieverding, M., & Müller, S. M. (2011). Gender-related traits as predictors
of alcohol use in male German and Spanish university students. Sex Roles, 64, 394404. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9897-9
Running head: MEN AND PARENTAL LEAVE
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations (in Parentheses) of Participants’ Demographics in Studies 1
and 2 as a Function of Condition (0, 2, or 12 months of leave) and Gender
0
Variables
Women
2
Men
Women
12
Men
Women
Men
Study 1
na
17
13
18
12
15
15
21.71
(2.42)
23.46
(2.47)
22.83
(3.03)
22.33
(2.64)
21.47
(1.73)
21.93
(2.05)
Semester 3.94
(2.25)
6.77
(2.74)
5.56
(3.20)
5.17
(2.88)
4.80
(2.24)
5.83
(3.04)
Subjectb
1: 61.5%
2: 0.0%
3: 7.7%
5: 30.8%
1: 50.0%
2: 11.1%
3: 0.0%
5: 38.9%
1: 58.3%
2: 33.3%
3: 8.3%
5: 0.0%
1: 60.0%
2: 0.0%
3: 20.0%
5: 20.0%
1: 66.7%
2: 0.0%
3: 0.0%
5: 26.7%
Age
1: 52.9%
2: 23.5%
3: 5.9%
5: 17.6%
Study 2
na
19
19
19
19
17
20
22.95
(2.95)
24.63
(2.52)
22.58
(2.67)
22.95
(2.32)
23.47
(2.15)
23.45
(2.65)
Semester 5.47
(2.99)
6.79
(3.31)
5.00
(2.94)
4.47
(2.41)
5.65
(3.14)
6.30
(3.10)
Age
Subjectb
1: 57.9% 1: 52.6%
1: 42.1% 1: 68.4%
1: 64.7% 1: 55.0%
3: 0.0%
3: 5.3%
3: 5.3%
3: 0.0%
3: 0.0%
3: 10.0%
4: 31.6% 4: 31.6%
4: 26.3% 4: 21.1%
4: 23.5% 4: 15.0%
5: 10.5% 5: 10.5%
5: 26.3% 5: 10.5%
5: 11.8% 5: 20.0%
Note. Participants’ age did not differ as a function of gender, F(1, 84) = 1.22, p = .272, in
Study 1; F(1, 107) = 1.97, p = .164, in Study 2; or condition, F(2, 84) = 1.30, p =.279, in Study
1, F(2, 107) = 1.58, p = .210, in Study 2. Participants’ semester also did not differ as a
function of gender, F(1, 81) = 3.78, p = .056, in Study 1; F(1, 107) = 0.73, p = .396, in Study
2; or condition, F(2, 81) < 0.01, p = .998, in Study 1; F(2, 107) = 2.47, p = .090, in Study 2.
Study subject did not differ by gender, Fisher’s exact test p = .843 in Study 1; Fisher’s exact
test p = .774 in Study 2; or condition, Fisher’s exact test p = .253 in Study 1; Fisher’s exact
test p = .860 in Study 2.
Subjects: 1 = business studies, 2 = business and economics education, 3 = economics, 4 =
management, 5 = other.
aAbsolute numbers. bPercentages.
42
Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations (in Parentheses) for all Dependent Variables in Study 1 as a
Function of Condition (0, 2, or 12 Months of Leave) and Gender
0
2
12
Variables
Women
n
17
13
18
12
15
15
Communion
3.18a
(0.56)
3.82a
(0.97)
4.66
(0.97)
4.90
(0.75)
4.84
(0.59)
4.97
(0.79)
Agency
4.51b
(0.87)
3.79b
(0.88)
4.23
(0.88)
4.58
(1.06)
4.27
(0.94)
4.06
(0.99)
Likeability
4.27
(1.09)
4.06
(0.86)
5.28
(0.65)
4.71
(1.05)
5.33
(0.65)
4.80
(0.94)
Respect
5.09c
(0.81)
3.65c
(1.31)
5.33
(0.89)
5.04
(0.99)
5.07d
(1.05)
4.10d
(1.21)
Competence
5.12e
(0.97)
4.25e
(0.85)
4.77
(1.09)
4.43
(1.24)
4.79
(0.66)
4.46
(1.03)
Men
Women
Men
Women
Men
5.49f
4.65f
5.23
4.73
5.01
4.52
(0.88)
(1.13)
(1.10)
(1.52)
(0.94)
(1.14)
Note. Possible values ranged from 1 to 7; higher values indicate higher ratings. Main effects
for condition were significant for communion, F(5, 84) = 13.39, p < .001, partial η² = .41;
liking, F(5, 84) = 9.75, p < .001, partial η² = .19; and respect, F(5, 84) = 5.21, p = .007, partial
η² = .11. Main effects for gender were significant for respect, F(5, 84) = 17.76, p < .001,
partial η² = .18; competence, F(5, 84) = 5.97, p = .017, partial η² = .07; and hiring, F(5, 84) =
6.67, p = .012, partial η² = .07.Means that share a subscript are significantly different from
each other (simple main effects, tests for differences for a variable only within condition).
Hiring
43
Table 3
Means and Standard Deviations (in Parentheses) for all Dependent Variables in Study 2 as a
Function of Condition (0, 2, or 12 Months of leave) and Gender
0
2
12
Variables
Women
n
19
19
19
19
17
20
Communion
3.48
(1.00)
3.89
(1.04)
4.33
(1.01)
3.79
(1.19)
4.42
(0.86)
4.17
(0.97)
Agency
4.98a
(0.81)
4.30a
(0.92)
4.09
(1.14)
4.44
(1.04)
4.54
(0.75)
4.44
(0.83)
Likeability
4.24
(1.25)
4.34
(1.05)
5.00
(1.34)
4.61
(1.12)
5.15
(0.77)
4.95
(0.94)
Respect
5.11
(0.77)
4.63
(1.03)
4.89
(1.29)
4.81
(1.23)
4.97
(0.96)
4.72
(1.04)
Competence
5.50
(0.61)
4.87
(0.89)
4.71
(1.31)
4.97
(1.22)
5.12
(0.79)
5.06
(0.99)
Men
Women
Men
Women
Men
Hiring
5.00
4.45
4.76
4.60
5.19
4.86
(1.07)
(1.55)
(1.49)
(1.45)
(0.81)
(1.24)
Note. Possible rating values ranged from 1 to 7; higher values indicate higher ratings. Main
effects for condition were significant for communion, F(2, 107) = 3.46, p = .035, partial η² =
.06; and likeability, F(2, 106) = 4.66, p = .012, partial η² = .08. Means that share a subscript
are significantly different from each other (simple main effects, tests for differences for a
variable only within condition).
44
Appendix
The original German scales used in Studies 1 and 2 can be found in Table A1. The original
German wording of the scenarios can be found in Table A2.
Table A1
Original German Scales Used in Studies 1 and 2
Scale
Items
Agency
See Zimmermann, Sieverding, & Müller, 2011
Communion
See Zimmermann, Sieverding, & Müller, 2011
Liking
Für wie sympathisch halten Sie den Bewerber?
Wie sehr würden die Kollegen in der Firma den Bewerber mögen?
Respect
Wie sehr würden Sie den Bewerber respektieren?
Wie sehr würde der Bewerber von den Kollegen in der Firma
respektiert werden?
Competence
See Hossiep & Paschen, 2003, for achievement motivation and
leadership motivation
Der Bewerber ist kompetent.
Hiring probability
Inwieweit soll der Bewerber für die ausgeschriebene Stelle in die
Vorwahl einbezogen werden?
Soll der Bewerber zu einem Vorstellungsgespräch eingeladen werden?
Würden Sie selbst den Bewerber für die ausgeschriebene Stelle
einstellen?
Wie wahrscheinlich ist es, dass der Bewerber die Stelle bekommt?
See Stöber, 1999
SDS-17
Manipulation check
War der Bewerber in Elternzeit?
Wenn ja: Wie lange war der Bewerber in Elternzeit?“
45
Table A2
Parental Leave Manipulation in the Curriculum Vitae (CV) and the Cover Letter
German original
English translation
-
-
CV
Study 1
0 months
2 months
03.2010-05.2010 Elternzeit
03.2010-05.2010 Parental leave
12 months
03.2010-03.2011 Elternzeit
Study 2
0 months
-
-
2 months
03.2011-05.2011 Elternzeit
12 months
03.2011-03.2012 Elternzeit
0 months
Momentan möchte ich mich
beruflich weiterentwickeln.
At the moment, I would like to
advance professionally.
2 months
Nach der Geburt meines zweiten
Kindes und der darauf folgenden
Elternzeit von zwei Monaten möchte
ich mich beruflich weiterentwickeln.
After the birth of my second child
and the corresponding parental
leave of 2 months, I would like to
Cover letter
12 months
Nach der Geburt meines zweiten
After the birth of my second child
Kindes und der darauf folgenden
and the corresponding parental
Elternzeit von zwölf Monaten
leave of 12 months, I would like to
möchte ich mich beruflich
weiterentwickeln.
Note. In Study 1, we used a position in human relations, in Study 2, a position in finance. The
parental leave manipulation was always the same in the cover letter. In the Curriculum Vitae,
the manipulation varied by the date of parental leave (1 year later in Study 2) because the
data in Study 2 were collected 1 year later.

Men who have taken parental leave

Transcription

Similar documents

Tax compliance costs: A business administration perspective

Fachbereich Tourismus Bachelor-Thesis - BEST

2011 - National Capital Poison Center

Zugangstor Hochschule Internationale