Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

The shifting standards model.

The figure visualizes the shifting standards model. The x-axis shows gender represented by the two groups of women and men. The y-axis shows perceived performance in a traditionally “masculine” task. The colored bars show actual performance, with darker bars indicating lower performance. The dotted lines show thresholds for perceived sufficient and outstanding performance, respectively. Note that these thresholds differ for women vs. men, with a lower threshold for women’s performance to be perceived as sufficient, but a higher threshold for their performance to be perceived as outstanding. This can lead to different judgments of the same performance level in women vs. men, in that low performance or status is judged more acceptable for women, while high performance or status is judged more positively for men.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Summary of theoretical frameworks and expected outcomes at intersections of gender and class.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Factor levels by dimension and country.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Example stimulus used in the UK/US, with manipulated dimensions highlighted.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 3.

Regression results for education and gender predicting attitude.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 3.

Predicted values of the two-way-interaction models.

X-Axis has been cropped to better visualize interaction effects; actual range of attitude is min – 2,29, max 1.92. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Predicted values of the three-way-interaction models including gender and gender norms (GSNI).

X-Axis has been cropped to better visualize interaction effects; actual range of attitude is min – 2,29, max 1.92. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Predicted values of the three-way-interaction models including gender and gender inequality (GII).

X-Axis has been cropped to better visualize interaction effects; actual range of attitude is min – 2,29, max 1.92. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Predicted values of the three-way-interaction models including gender and general inequality (Isum).

X-Axis has been cropped to better visualize interaction effects; actual range of attitude is min – 2,29, max 1.92. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 4.

Regression results for job and gender predicting attitude.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Regression results for income and gender predicting attitude.

More »

Table 5 Expand