Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/76691
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKrys, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorCapaldi, CAen_US
dc.contributor.authorvan, Tilburg, Wen_US
dc.contributor.authorLipp, OVen_US
dc.contributor.authorBond, MHen_US
dc.contributor.authorVauclair, CMen_US
dc.contributor.authorManickam, LSSen_US
dc.contributor.authorDomínguezEspinosa, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorTorres, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorLun, VMCen_US
dc.contributor.authorTeyssier, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorMiles, LKen_US
dc.contributor.authorHansen, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorPark, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorWagner, Wen_US
dc.contributor.authorYu, AAen_US
dc.contributor.authorXing, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorWise, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorSun, CRen_US
dc.contributor.authorSiddiqui, RSen_US
dc.contributor.authorSalem, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorRizwan, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorPavlopoulos, Ven_US
dc.contributor.authorNader, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorMaricchiolo, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorMalbran, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorJavangwe, Gen_US
dc.contributor.authorIşik, Ien_US
dc.contributor.authorIgbokwe, DOen_US
dc.contributor.authorHur, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorHassan, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorGonzalez, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorFülöp, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorDenoux, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorCenko, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorChkhaidze, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorShmeleva, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorAntalíková, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorAhmed, RAen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-10T02:56:29Z-
dc.date.available2018-05-10T02:56:29Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationInternational journal of psychology, 2017, p. 2en_US
dc.identifier.issn0020-7594-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/76691-
dc.description.abstractInequalities between men and women are common and well‐documented. Objective indexes show that men are better positioned than women in societal hierarchies—there is no single country in the world without a gender gap. In contrast, researchers have found that the women‐are‐wonderful effect—that women are evaluated more positively than men overall—is also common. Cross‐cultural studies on gender equality reveal that the more gender egalitarian the society is, the less prevalent explicit gender stereotypes are. Yet, because self‐reported gender stereotypes may differ from implicit attitudes towards each gender, we reanalysed data collected across 44 cultures, and (a) confirmed that societal gender egalitarianism reduces the women‐are‐wonderful effect when it is measured more implicitly (i.e. rating the personality of men and women presented in images) and (b) documented that the social perception of men benefits more from gender egalitarianism than that of women.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipDepartment of Management and Marketingen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwellen_US
dc.relation.ispartofInternational journal of psychologyen_US
dc.subjectCultureen_US
dc.subjectSocial cognitionen_US
dc.subjectGender egalitarianismen_US
dc.subjectGender stereotypesen_US
dc.subjectImplicit attitudesen_US
dc.titleCatching up with wonderful women : the women-are-wonderful effect is smaller in more gender egalitarian societiesen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.spage2-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ijop.12420-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85015303007-
dc.identifier.eissn1464-066X-
dc.description.validate201805 bcrc-
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

1
Citations as of Jun 13, 2018

Page view(s)

107
Citations as of Jun 18, 2018

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.