Language matters… including in promoting equal rights for all.
Framing the gender gap as “men’s overrepresentation” — as opposed to “women’s underrepresentation” — in political leadership elicited more anger at the disparity among women, and increased perceptions that the gap is unjust. Also, this anger at the disparity led women to take action to address it.
This is according to a study — “Women underrepresented or men overrepresented? Framing influences women’s affective and behavioral responses to gender gap in political leadership” by Usman Liaquat, Madeline E. Heilman, Rachel D. Godsil and Emily Balcetis — that appeared in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
As background: Most people “acknowledge that gender diversity in leadership is important,” said Balcetis. However, current coverage of this issues focuses on gender gap as women’s underrepresentation, which could desensitize the public.
The researchers, therefore, wanted to see if reframing this gender gap in terms of “men’s overrepresentation” — rather than as “women’s underrepresentation” — would have an impact on perceptions of the issue and on motivations to address it.
“For many, taking the same statistics, like that 29% of Congress is female, but reframing the issue as men’s overrepresentation, by saying instead that 71% of Congress is male, elicits stronger emotional responses and spurs people to do something to increase access to leadership for men and women,” Balcetis said.
Methodological design
In a series of experimental studies, participants read mock news articles that were based on real-world data on the gender gap in politics and in business. The articles were manipulated to adopt different frames: the gap was couched as either women’s underrepresentation or men’s overrepresentation, with the underlying facts remaining constant.
The experiments then measured the participants’ responses under each condition. These included expressed anger at the gender gap in business and politics as well as willingness to support a piece of federal legislation — Women’s Global Empowerment, Development, and Prosperity Act of 2020 — which was moving through congressional committees in the Senate at the time of the study. Participants also had the option of writing a letter to their congressional representative indicating their reaction to the bill, with the researchers tracking whether or not these letters supported or opposed the legislation.
The researchers also measured participants’ stated willingness to address this leadership gap more broadly — by writing social-media posts, by taking action despite material or relationship costs (e.g., taking action that could harm future job prospects), or by donating to programs aimed at confronting this discrepancy. In addition, participants had an opportunity to read an article reporting on strategies to reduce gender disparity in leadership — a methodological element designed to gauge interest in this issue.
Key findings
The mock stories that framed the gender gap as men’s overrepresentation in political leadership elicited more anger at the disparity among women—but not among men—than did those that framed the gap as women’s underrepresentation. However, this effect was not found among either women or men for business leadership stories.
In addition, women’s anger at the disparity — regardless of how the gap was framed in the mock news stories — was associated with several behaviors. These included participants spending more time reading stories on how to change the status quo, writing stronger letters to their congressional representative supporting proposed legislation addressing gender disparity, and a stronger expressed desire to donate to gender-bias reduction programs.
“Framing the gender gap in politics as due to men’s advantages — in this case, men’s overrepresentation — as opposed to women’s disadvantages—their underrepresentation — not only affects how women view this concern, but also prompts action to combat it,” concluded lead author Liaquat.
However, the researchers add that the men’s overrepresentation framing had some limitations. One, its impact did not apply to business leadership among both men and women and, two, among men, this messaging did not increase anger at the disparity.
“Our society benefits when we have women as well as men as leaders in politics and business,” said Godsil. “It is crucial that we can all be confident that no one is shut out of leadership positions because of their gender.”
