[DanaC]

No, but the point is, when presented with the same details of a successful and effective manager along with anecdotal stuff about their interaction style, but with the gender given as male to one group and female to another group, the group who thought the person was female all indicated that they expected a low level of likeability from her. The group with the male name all expected a high level of likeability. The groups answering were mixed. Women also expected that the female would be unlikable and the male likeable, despite them being the same person with the same achievement level and same anecdotal character interactions.



[eta] In terms of interaction: the groups also indicated how specific instances affected the likeability of the subject. When given an example of how they interacted with the people they managed, that interaction when it had a male name on the study was seen to show that the person was confident and straight talking, fun, and a bunch of other positives. When the same interaction had a female name on the study it was seen to show that she was confident, strident, overly ambitious, cold and a bunch of other negatives.

Both groups thought that their case study manager was effective, competant, hard working and deserving of their success. But they thought they would enjoy working for him...but wouldn't enjoy working for her. They thought he would be good company, and that she would not be.

All they had to do was change the name on the file. Same behaviours, interactions and successes. But those specific interactions (managing their staff) made him both successful and likeable, but her successful and unlikeable.