Just Like a Woman? Effects of Gender-Biased Perceptions of Friendship Network Brokerage on Attributions and Performance

References

• Allen NJ, Hecht TD (2004) The “romance of teams”: Toward an understanding of its psychological underpinnings and implications. J. Occupation. Organ. Psych. 77(4):439–461.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bales RF, Slater PE (1955) Role differentiation in small decision-making groups. Parsons T, Bales RF, eds. Family, Socialization, and Interaction Process (Free Press, Glencoe, IL), 259–306.Google Scholar
• Balkundi P, Harrison DA (2006) Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inferences about network structure’s effects on team viability. Acad. Management J. 49(1):49–68.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balkundi P, Kilduff M, Barsness ZI, Michael JH (2007) Demographic antecedents and performance consequences of structural holes in work teams. J. Organ. Behav. 28(2):241–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Halgin DS (2011) Consensus analysis. Kronenfeld D, DeMunck V, Fischer M, Bennardo G, eds. A Companion to Cognitive Anthropology (Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, UK), 171–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brands RA (2013) Cognitive social structures in social network research: A review. J. Organ. Behav. 34(S1):S82–S103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1998) The gender of social capital. Rationality Soc. 10(1):5–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2005) Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS, Ronchi D (2007) Teaching executives to see social capital: Results from a field experiment. Soc. Sci. Res. 36(3):1156–1183.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS, Kilduff M, Tasselli S (2013) Social network analysis: Foundations and frontiers on advantage. Annual Rev. Psych. 64:527–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caldwell M, Peplau L (1982) Sex differences in same-sex friendship. Sex Roles 8(7):721–732.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T (1998) Seeing things clearly: Social structure, personality, and accuracy in social network perception. Soc. Networks 20(4):331–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Lobo MS (2008) When competence is irrelevant: The role of interpersonal affect in task-related ties. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(4):655–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cuddy AJC, Fiske ST, Glick P (2004) When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn’t cut the ice. J. Soc. Issues 60(4):701–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Soto CB (1960) Learning a social structure. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 60(3):417–421.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dekker D, Krackhardt D, Snijders TAB (2007) Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions. Psychometrika 72(4):563–581.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delia JG, Crockett WH (1973) Social schemas, cognitive complexity, and the learning of social structures. J. Personality 41(3):413–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH (2009) The his and hers of prosocial behavior: An examination of the social psychology of gender. Amer. Psychologist 64(8):644–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Karau SJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psych. Rev. 109(3):573–598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Steffen VJ (1984) Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 46(4):735–754.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Makhijani MG, Klonsky BG (1992) Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psych. Bull. 111(1):3–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischer CS (1982) What do we mean by “friend”? An inductive study. Soc. Networks 3(4):287–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Cuddy AJC, Glick P, Xu J (2002) A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 82(6):878–902.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Xu J, Cuddy AM, Glick P (1999) (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. J. Soc. Issues 55(3):473–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fletcher JK (1999) Disappearing Acts: Gender, Power, and Relational Practice at Work (MIT Press, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ, Reagans RE, Guillory L (2010) Do you two know each other? Transitivity, homophily, and the need for (network) closure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 99(5):855–869.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ, Reagans RE, Amanatullah ET, Ames DR (2006) Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 91(6):1123–1137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman LC (1979) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Networks 1(3):215–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman LC (1992) Filling in the blanks: A theory of cognitive categories and the structure of social affiliation. Soc. Psych. Quart. 55(2):118–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geary DC, Byrd-Craven J, Hoard MK, Vigil J, Numtee C (2003) Evolution and development of boys’ social behavior. Development. Rev. 23(4):444–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glick P (1995) Images of occupations: Components of gender and status in occupational stereotypes. Sex Roles 32(9):565–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Glick P, Diebold J, Bailey-Werner B, Zhu L (1997) The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 23(12):1323–1334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2001) Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes affect women’s ascent up the organisational ladder. J. Soc. Issues 57(4):657–674.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME, Haynes MC (2005) No credit where credit is due: Attributional rationalization of women’s success in male–female teams. J. Appl. Psych. 90(5):905–916.Crossref, 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):81–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman MEE (2004) Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. J. Appl. Psych. 89(3):416–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1992) Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37(3):422–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H, Kilduff M, Tsai W (2005) Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organ. Sci. 16(4):359–371.Link, Google Scholar
• Janicik GA, Larrick RP (2005) Social network schemas and the learning of incomplete networks. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 88(2):348–364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Kilduff M, Crossland C, Tsai W, Krackhardt D (2008) Organizational network perceptions versus reality: A small world after all? Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 107(1):15–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kilduff MA, Krackhardt D (1994) Bringing the individual back in: A structural analysis of the internal market for reputation in organizations. Acad. Management J. 37(1):87–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koenig AM, Eagly AH, Mitchel AA, Ristikari T (2011) Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psych. Bull. 137(4):616–642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korkki P (2011) For women, parity is still a subtly steep climb. New York Times (October 8) MM9.Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1987a) Cognitive social structures. Soc. Networks 9(2):109–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1987b) QAP partialling as a test of spuriousness. Soc. Networks 9(2):171–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1990) Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(2):342–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D (1992) The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. Nohria N, Eccles R, eds. Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action (Harvard Business School Press, Boston), 216–239.Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Kilduff M (1990) Friendship patterns and culture: The control of organizational diversity. Amer. Anthropologist 92(1):142–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Kilduff M (1999) Whether close or far: Social distance effects on perceived balance in friendship networks. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 76(5):770–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Porter LW (1986) The snowball effect: Turnover embedded in communication networks. J. Appl. Psych. 71(1):50–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krackhardt D, Stern R (1988) Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Soc. Psych. Quart. 51(2):123–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee C, Farh J-L (2004) Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance. Appl. Psych. 53(1):136–154.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lincoln JR, Miller J (1979) Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relational networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 24(2):181–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Masser B, Grass K, Nesic M (2007) “We like you, but we don’t want you”—The impact of pregnancy in the workplace. Sex Roles 57(9):703–712.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Masser BM, Abrams D (2004) Reinforcing the glass ceiling: The consequences of hostile sexism for female managerial candidates. Sex Roles 51(9):609–615.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27:415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meeker BF, Weitzel-O’Neill PA (1977) Sex roles and interpersonal behavior in task-oriented groups. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 42(1):91–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Kilduff M, Brass DJ (1998) At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of under-represented groups. Acad. Management J. 41(4):441–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Kilduff M, Brass DJ (2001) The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(1):121–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Dixon AL, Brass DJ, Robertson B (2006) The social network ties of group leaders: Implications for group performance and leader reputation. Organ. Sci. 17(1):64–79.Link, Google Scholar
• Miller JB (2012) Toward a New Psychology of Women (Beacon Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Flynn FJ (2008) The case for behavioural decision research in organizational behaviour. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):399–431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morrison EW (2002) Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1149–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nebenzahl ID, Jaffe ED, Gotesdyner H (1993) Perceptions of Israeli male and female managerial behavior in small group interactions. Internat. Stud. Management Organ. 23(3):97–111.Google Scholar
• Oh H, Kilduff M (2008) The ripple effect of personality on social structure: Self-monitoring origins of network brokerage. J. Appl. Psych. 93(5):1155–1164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2001) Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(1):33–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raudenbush S, Bryk A, Cheong YF, Congdon R, du Toit M (2011) Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling (Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, IL).Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (1991) Introduction: Gender and the role of interaction in inequality. Ridgeway CL, ed. Gender, Interaction, and Inequality (Springer-Verlag, New York), xi–xvi.Google Scholar
• Romney AK, Weller SC, Batchelder WH (1986) Culture as consensus: A theory of culture and informant accuracy. Amer. Anthropologist 88(2):313–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shamir B, Howell JM (1999) Organizational and contextual influences on the emergence and effectiveness of charismatic leadership. Leadership Quart. 10(2):257–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simmel G (1950) The Sociology of Georg Simmel (Free Press, Glencoe, IL).Google Scholar
• Sparrowe RT, Liden RC (2005) Two routes to influence: Integrating leader-member exchange and social network perspectives. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(4):505–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spence JT, Buckner CE (2000) Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psych. Women Quart. 24(1):44–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steniner ID (1972) Group Process and Productivity (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Stovel K, Shaw L (2012) Brokerage. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38:139–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Emmerik IJH (2006) Gender differences in the creation of different types of social capital: A multilevel study. Soc. Networks 28(1):24–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Baeyer CL, Sherk DL, Zanna MP (1981) Impression management in the job interview: When the female applicant meets the male (chauvinist) interviewer. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 7(1):45–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vuong QH (1989) Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses. Econometrica 57(2):307–333.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber ML (1998) SHE STANDS ALONE: A review of the recent literature on women and social support. White paper, Prairie Women’s Health Centre of Excellence, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.Google Scholar
• Wood GJ, Lindorff M (2001) Sex differences in explanations for career progress. Women Management Rev. 16(4):152–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wood W, Karten SJ (1986) Sex differences in interaction style as a product of perceived sex differences in competence. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 50(2):341–347.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wood W, Rhodes N (1991) Sex differences in interaction style in task groups. Ridgeway CL, ed. Gender, Interaction, and Inequality (Springer-Verlag, New York), 97–121.Google Scholar
• Xiao Z, Tsui AS (2007) When brokers may not work: The cultural contingency of social capital in Chinese high-tech firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(1):1–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yamagishi T, Cook KS, Watabe M (1998) Uncertainty, trust, and commitment formation in the United States and Japan. Amer. J. Sociol. 104(1):165–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zanna MP, Pack SJ (1975) On the self-fulfilling nature of apparent sex differences in behavior. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 11(6):583–591.Crossref, Google Scholar