The Effect of Gender Expectations and Physical Attractiveness on Discussion of Weakness in Online Professional Recommendations

References

• Aamodt MG, Bryan DA, Whitcomb AJ (1993) Predicting performance with letters of recommendation. Public Personality Management 22(1):81–90.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE (2003) The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 85(4):768.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Wojciszke B (2007) Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. J. Personality Soc. Psych. Quart. 93(5):751.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Wojciszke B (2014) Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Elsevier, New York), 195–255.Google Scholar
• Agarwal R, Karahanna E (2000) Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 24(4):665–694.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baert S (2018) Facebook profile picture appearance affects recruiters’ first hiring decisions. New Media Soc. 20(3):1220–1239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 16(1):74–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baroudi JJ, Orlikowski WJ (1989) The problem of statistical power in MIS research. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 13(1):87–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basford TE, Offermann LR, Behrend TS (2014) Do you see what I see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psych. Women Quart. 38(3):340–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berlyne DE (1971) Aesthetics and Psychobiology (Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York).Google Scholar
• Brauer M, Er-Rafiy A, Kawakami K, Phills CE (2012) Describing a group in positive terms reduces prejudice less effectively than describing it in positive and negative terms. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 48(3):757–761.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Braun S, Peus C, Frey D (2012) Is beauty beastly? Gender-specific effects of leader attractiveness and leadership style on followers’ trust and loyalty. Zeitschrift Psych. 220(2):98–108.Google Scholar
• Butow E, Taylor K (2008) How to Succeed in Business Using Linkedin: Making Connections and Capturing Opportunities on the World’s# 1 Business Networking Site (AMACOM, New York).Google Scholar
• Cascio WF, Aguinis H (2010) Applied Psychology in Human Resource Management, 7th ed. (Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Cavico FJ, Muffler SC, Mujtaba BG (2012) Appearance discrimination,” lookism” and “lookphobia” in the workplace. J. Appl. Bus. Res. 28(5):791.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ceci SJ, Peters D (1984) Letters of reference: A naturalistic study of the effects of confidentiality. Amer. Psych. 39(1):29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cejka MA, Eagly AH (1999) Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 25(4):413–423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Rustichini A, Van de Ven J (2018) Self-confidence and strategic behavior. Experiment. Econom. 21(1):72–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen JJ (2008) Ordinary vs. Extraordinary: Differential Reactions to Men’s and Women’s Prosocial Behavior in the Workplace (New York University, New York).Google Scholar
• Chiang JK-H, Suen H-Y (2015) Self-presentation and hiring recommendations in online communities: Lessons from Linkedin. Comput. Human Behav. 48:516–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods Bus. Res. 295(2):295–336.Google Scholar
• Chin WW, Marcolin BL, Newsted PR (2003) A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inform. Systems Res. 14(2):189–217.Link, Google Scholar
• Chung P-P, Leung K (1988) Effects of performance information and physical attractiveness on managerial decisions about promotion. J. Soc. Psych. 128(6):791–801.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Ed. Psych. Measures 20(1):37–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1992) A power primer. Psych. Bull. 112(1):155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (2013) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (Routledge, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conger AJ (1974) A revised definition for suppressor variables: A guide to their identification and interpretation. Edu. Psych. Measures 34(1):35–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Costrich N, Feinstein J, Kidder L, Marecek J, Pascale L (1975) When stereotypes hurt: Three studies of penalties for sex-role reversals. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 11(6):520–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crowley AE, Hoyer WD (1994) An integrative framework for understanding two-sided persuasion. J. Consumer Res. 20(4):561–574.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cvetkovich G (1999) The attribution of social trust. Cvetkovich G, Lofstedt RE, eds. Social Trust the Management of Risk (Routledge, London), 53–61.Google Scholar
• DeAndrea DC (2014) Advancing warranting theory. Comm. Theory 24(2):186–204.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Desir J (2010) Lookism: Pushing the frontier of equality by looking beyond the law. University Illinois Law Rev. 2010(2):629–654.Google Scholar
• Dimitriadis S, Lee M, Ramarajan L, Battilana J (2017) Blurring the boundaries: The interplay of gender and local communities in the commercialization of social ventures. Organ. Sci. 28(5):819–839.Link, Google Scholar
• Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E (1972) What is beautiful is good. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 24(3):285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH (2013) Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-Role Interpretation (Psychology Press).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Ashmore RD, Makhijani MG, Longo LC (1991) What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psych. Bull. 110(1):109.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Karau SJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psych. Rev. 109(3):573.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Mladinic A (1989) Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 15(4):543–558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Wood W (2012) Social role theory. van Lange P, Kruglanksi A, Higgins ET, eds. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 458–476.Google Scholar
• Edwards C, Stoll B, Faculak N, Karman S (2015) Social presence on Linkedin: Perceived credibility and interpersonal attractiveness based on user profile picture. Online J. Comm. Media Tech. 5(4):102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Efran MG (1974) The effect of physical appearance on the judgment of guilt, interpersonal attraction, and severity of recommended punishment in a simulated jury task. J. Res. Personality 8(1):45–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Efran MG, Patterson E (1974) Voters vote beautiful: The effect of physical appearance on a national election. Canadian J. Behav. Sci. 6(4):352.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ein-Gar D, Shiv B, Tormala ZL (2011) When blemishing leads to blossoming: The positive effect of negative information. J. Consumer Res. 38(5):846–859.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisend M (2006) Two-sided advertising: A meta-analysis. Internat. J. Res. Marketing 23(2):187–198.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsesser KM, Lever J (2011) Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey. Human Relations 64(12):1555–1578.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Etcoff NL, Stock S, Haley LE, Vickery SA, House DM (2011) Cosmetics as a feature of the extended human phenotype: Modulation of the perception of biologically important facial signals. PLoS One 6(10):e25656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A-G (2009) Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 41(4):1149–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Marketing Res. 18(1):39–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Försterling F, Preikschas S, Agthe M (2007) Ability, luck, and looks: An evolutionary look at achievement ascriptions and the sexual attribution bias. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 92(5):775.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gandini A (2016) Digital work: Self-branding and social capital in the freelance knowledge economy. Marketing Theory 16(1):123–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garg R, Telang R (2017) To be or not to be linked: Online social networks and job search by unemployed workforce. Management Sci. 64(8):3926–3941.Link, Google Scholar
• Golden LL, Alpert MI (1987) Comparative analysis of the relative effectiveness of one-and two-sided communication for contrasting products. J. Advertising 16(1):18–68.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grams R, Schwab DP (1985) An investigation of systematic gender-related error in job evaluation. Acad. Management J. 28(2):279–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Hamermesh DS (2011) Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamilton R, Vohs KD, McGill AL (2014) We’ll be honest, this won’t be the best article you’ll ever read: The use of dispreferred markers in word-of-mouth communication. J. Consumer Res. 41(1):197–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart W, Ottati VC, Krumdick ND (2011) Physical attractiveness and candidate evaluation: A model of correction. Political Psych. 32(2):181–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (1983) Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Res. Organ. Behav. 5:269–298.Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (1995) Sex stereotypes and their effects in the workplace: What we know and what we don’t know. J. Soc. Behav. Personality 10(4):3.Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2001) Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. J. Soc. Issues 57(4):657–674.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2012) Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Res. Organ. Behav. 32:113–135.Google Scholar
• Heilman ME, Okimoto TG (2007) Why are women penalized for success at male tasks?: The implied communality deficit. J. Appl. Psych. 92(1):81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME, Saruwatari LR (1979) When beauty is beastly: The effects of appearance and sex on evaluations of job applicants for managerial and nonmanagerial jobs. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 23(3):360–372.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME, Stopeck MH (1985a) Attractiveness and corporate success: Different causal attributions for males and females. J. Appl. Psych. 70(2):379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME, Stopeck MH (1985b) Being attractive, advantage or disadvantage? Performance-based evaluations and recommended personnel actions as a function of appearance, sex, and job type. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 35(2):202–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hickling EJ, Noel RC, Yutzler FD (1979) Attractiveness and occupational status. J. Psych. 102(1):71–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen ML, Averbeck JM, Zhang Z, Wright KB (2013) Credibility of anonymous online product reviews: A language expectancy perspective. J. Management Inform. Systems 30(1):293–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jobvite (2016) Social recruiting survey results. Retrieved September 5, 2018, https://www.jobvite.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/RecruiterNation2016.pdf.Google Scholar
• Kehn C (2012) The Effect of Competence, Likeability, and Sex on Performance Evaluations of Managers (San Jose State University, San Jose, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ko D-G, Kirsch LJ, King WR (2005) Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 29(1):59–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kramer AS, Harris AB (2016) Breaking Through Bias: Communication Techniques for Women to Succeed at Work (Routledge, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larkin GL, Marco CA (2001) Ethics seminars: Beyond authorship requirements—Ethical considerations in writing letters of recommendation. Acad. Emergency Medicine 8(1):70–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larsen RJ, Marx ML (2013) Introduction to Mathematical Statistics and Its Applications: Pearson New International Edition (Pearson Higher Ed).Google Scholar
• Leising D, Erbs J, Fritz U (2010) The letter of recommendation effect in informant ratings of personality. J. Personality Soc. Psych. Quart. 98(4):668.Crossref, Google Scholar
• LinkedIn (2017) Hiding and unhiding your recommendations. Retrieved August 1, 2020, https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/165.Google Scholar
• Lipsey MW, Wilson DB (1993) The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment: Confirmation from meta-analysis. Amer. Psych. 48(12):1181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Little LM, Major VS, Hinojosa AS, Nelson DL (2015) Professional image maintenance: How women navigate pregnancy in the workplace. Acad. Management J. 58(1):8–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lundeberg MA, Fox PW, Punćcohaŕ J (1994) Highly confident but wrong: Gender differences and similarities in confidence judgments. J. Edu. Psych. 86(1):114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Madera JM, Hebl MR, Martin RC (2009) Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. J. Appl. Psych. 94(6):1591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahalik JR (1999) Incorporating a gender role strain perspective in assessing and treating men’s cognitive distortions. Professional Psych.: Res. Practice 30(4):333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marlowe CM, Schneider SL, Nelson CE (1996) Gender and attractiveness biases in hiring decisions: Are more experienced managers less biased? J. Appl. Psych. 81(1):11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mathieson K, Peacock E, Chin WW (2001) Extending the technology acceptance model: The influence of perceived user resources. ACM SIGMIS Database 32(3):86–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Metzger MJ (2007) Making sense of credibility on the web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 58(13):2078–2091.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Metzger MJ, Flanagin AJ (2013) Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics. J. Pragmatics (59):210–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mobius MM, Rosenblat TS (2006) Why beauty matters. Amer. Econom. Rev. 96(1):222–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore GC, Benbasat I (1991) Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Inform. Systems Res. 2(3):192–222.Link, Google Scholar
• Moss-Racusin CA, Phelan JE, Rudman LA (2010) When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psych. Men Masculinity 11(2):140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Niederle M, Vesterlund L (2007) Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? Quart. J. Econom. 122(3):1067–1101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ollier-Malaterre A, Rothbard NP, Berg JM (2013) When worlds collide in cyberspace: How boundary work in online social networks impacts professional relationships. Acad. Management Rev. 38(4):645–669.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pechmann C (1992) Predicting when two-sided ads will be more effective than one-sided ads: The role of correlational and correspondent inferences. J. Marketing Res. 29(4):441–453.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter N, Geis F (1981) Women and nonverbal leadership cues: When seeing is not believing. Gender and Nonverbal Behavior (Springer, Berlin), 39–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 40(3):879–891.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Range LM, Menyhert A, Walsh ML, Hardin KN, Ellis JB, Craddick R (1991) Letters of recommendation: Perspectives, recommendations, and ethics. Professional Psych.: Res. Practice 22(5):389.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rieh SY, Danielson DR (2007) Credibility: A multidisciplinary framework. Annu. Rev. Inform. Sci. Tech. 41(1):307–364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rooth D-O (2009) Obesity, attractiveness, and differential treatment in hiring a field experiment. J. Human Resources 44(3):710–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosette AS, Tost LP (2010) Agentic women and communal leadership: How role prescriptions confer advantage to top women leaders. J. Appl. Psych. 95(2):221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rucker DD, Petty RE, Briñol P (2008) What’s in a frame anyway?: A meta‐cognitive analysis of the impact of one versus two sided message framing on attitude certainty. J. Consumer Psych. 18(2):137–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rudman LA (1998) Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 74(3):629.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rudman LA, Glick P (2001) Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. J. Soc. Issues 57(4):743–762.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ruffle BJ, Shtudiner Ze (2014) Are good-looking people more employable? Management Sci. 61(8):1760–1776.Link, Google Scholar
• Rui JR (2018) Objective evaluation or collective self-presentation: What people expect of Linkedin recommendations. Comput. Human Behav. (89):121–128.Google Scholar
• Settle RB, Golden LL (1974) Attribution theory and advertiser credibility. J. Marketing Res. 11(2):181–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shrout PE, Bolger N (2002) Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psych. Methods 7(4):422.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sigelman L, Sigelman CK, Fowler C (1987) A bird of a different feather? An experimental investigation of physical attractiveness and the electability of female candidates. Soc. Psych. Quart. 50(1):32–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith RE, Hunt SD (1978) Attributional processes and effects in promotional situations. J. Consumer Res. 5(3):149–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stayman D, Hoyer W, Leon R (1987) Attribute importance in discounting product features in advertising. Proc. Amer. Marketing Assoc. Summer Educators’ Conf. (American Marketing Association, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Sundar SS (2008) The Main Model: A Heuristic Approach to Understanding Technology Effects on Credibility (MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Initiative, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Sussman SW, Siegal WS (2003) Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Inform. Systems Res. 14(1):47–65.Link, Google Scholar
• Todorov A, Mandisodza AN, Goren A, Hall CC (2005) Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science 308(5728):1623–1626.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trix F, Psenka C (2003) Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse Soc. 14(2):191–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uchronski M, Abele AE, Bruckmüller S (2013) Empathic perspective taking and the situational malleability of the communal self-concept. Self Identity 12(3):238–258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Dijck J (2013) ‘You have one identity’: Performing the self on Facebook and Linkedin. Media Culture Soc. 35(2):199–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walther JB, Parks MR (2002) Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. Knapp ML, Daly JA, eds. Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, 3rd ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 529–563.Google Scholar
• Walther JB, Van Der Heide B, Hamel LM, Shulman HC (2009) Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Comm. Res. 36(2):229–253.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wigboldus DH, Dijksterhuis A, van Knippenberg A (2003) When stereotypes get in the way: Stereotypes obstruct stereotype-inconsistent trait inferences. J. Personality Soc. Psych. Quart. 84(3):470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wood RE, Goodman JS, Beckmann N, Cook A (2008) Mediation testing in management research: A review and proposals. Organ. Res. Methods 11(2):270–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yaghoubi Jami P, Mansouri B, Thoma SJ, Han H (2019) An investigation of the divergences and convergences of trait empathy across two cultures. J. Moral Edu. 48(2):214–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhao X, Lynch JG Jr, Chen Q (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. J. Consumer Res. 37(2):197–206.Crossref, Google Scholar