Attraktive Frauen und Männer profitieren in den meisten Situationen von ihrem guten Aussehen. Nicht so good looking women, die in einer Branche arbeiten, in der männliche Attribute, männliches Erscheinungsbild gefragt sind. Career-Women fragte nach bei Stefanie Johnson, Studienverantwortliche an der University of Colorado, Denver.
Die Studienergebnisse wurden gerade in „The Journal of Social Psychology“ veröffentlicht unter:.
Physical Attractiveness Biases in Ratings of Employment Suitability: Tracking Down the “Beauty is Beastly” Effect
ABSTRACT. The “what is beautiful is good” heuristic suggests that physically attractive persons benefit from their attractiveness in a large range of situations, including perceptions of employment suitability. Conversely, the “beauty is beastly” effect suggests that attractiveness can be detrimental to women in certain employment contexts, although these findings have been less consistent than those for the “what is beautiful is good” effect. The current research seeks to uncover situations in which beauty might be detrimental for female applicants. In two studies, we found that attractiveness can be detrimental for women applying for masculine sex-typed jobs for which physical appearance is perceived as unimportant.
Career-Women: Which jobs are specially masculine sex-typed in USA?
Stefanie Johnson: In our study the jobs that were seen as masculine included: prison guard, director of finance, car salesman.
Career-Women: Are there special branches of industry without any touch to physical attractive?
Stefanie Johnson: Jobs for which attractiveness was perceived as unimportant included: social worker, director of day care services, two truck driver.
Career-Women: A good looking women working as HR-chief in a steel plant, does that work?
Stefanie Johnson: Very good question — I would guess yes, because HR was perceived as a feminine field in our study.
Address correspondence to Stefanie K. Johnson, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA; stefanie.johnson@ucdenver.edu
