| dc.description.abstract | This study focuses on evaluations of women in leadership positions by men and women in whom the gender hierarchy is threatened, with a specific focus on Queen Bee behavior. Because Queen Bees legitimize and maintain the gender hierarchy, we expect men to prefer Queen Bees when the gender hierarchy is threatened. On the other hand, Queen Bees distance themselves from other women, which leads to our expectation that women will evaluate a feminist and neutral woman more positively than a Queen Bee in the same circumstances. We tested these hypotheses by having participants read an article about the women's quota, which serves as a threat to the gender hierarchy. Next, participants were asked to rate profiles of female leaders, where the candidates consisted of a Queen Bee, feminist, and neutral woman. As expected, men rated a Queen Bee higher in terms of leadership positions. However, men didn't seem to like the Queen Bee more than the feminist and neutral woman. Contrary to expectations, women did not necessarily rate the Queen Bee more negatively than the other women, but mainly preferred the feminist for leadership positions. As expected, women seemed to like the Queen Bee less than the other women. From these results, it can be concluded that Queen Bee behavior is beneficial for women when they have to be chosen for a leadership position by a man, but not by a woman or in terms of likability on a personal level. | |
