Hardacre Stephanie L, Subašić Emina
School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Front Psychol. 2018 Dec 11;9:2497. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02497. eCollection 2018.
Social psychologists have not fully investigated the role of leadership in mobilizing widespread support for social change, particularly gender equality. The burden of achieving gender equality is typically placed on women (particularly female leaders) - the main targets of such inequality. Traditional approaches frame workplace gender equality as either a , which limits men's (non-target's) involvement in the movement, or a that exists due to women's (target's) tendency to pursue less intensive careers. In contrast to such work focusing on women's experiences as targets of discrimination or men's role in preserving inequality, we propose a solidarity-based approach that positions men and women as . This approach relies on two processes: leadership processes - particularly leadership as a form of influence based on shared identities among leaders and followers (e.g., their gender group); and political solidarity as a way to mobilize the silent majority (men) to work as allies beside a minority (women) and embrace equality as a common cause for groups. In two experiments ( = 338, 336) we studied how leader gender and message framing affect men's and women's support for equality by contrasting a solidarity-based framing of gender equality as a common cause for men and women, with a women's issue frame (Experiment 1) or a meritocratic frame (Experiment 2). The statement was attributed to a male or female leader (Experiments 1-2) or, additionally, to a government agency (Experiment 1). Women reported higher sense of common cause (Experiment 2) and collective action intentions than men (Experiments 1-2), and higher intentions under common cause compared to meritocracy frames (Experiment 2). Interestingly, male leaders invoked higher sense of common cause and collective action intentions for both men women regardless of framing (Experiment 2). Irrespective of leader gender however, as predicted common cause framing boosted perceived leader prototypicality, legitimacy, and influence across the board (Experiments 1-2). Yet this was qualified by women (compared to men) rating leaders as more legitimate and influential under common cause compared to meritocracy framing (Experiment 2). Women's reactions to equality messages, and the intersection of leadership and solidarity toward equality are discussed.
社会心理学家尚未充分研究领导力在动员社会变革（尤其是性别平等）的广泛支持方面所起的作用。实现性别平等的重担通常落在女性（尤其是女性领导者）身上，她们是这种不平等的主要目标群体。传统方法将职场性别平等要么框定为一种 ，这限制了男性（非目标群体）对该运动的参与，要么框定为一种 ，这种情况是由于女性（目标群体）倾向于追求强度较低的职业而存在的。与这类关注女性作为歧视目标的经历或男性在维护不平等方面的作用的研究不同，我们提出一种基于团结的方法，将男性和女性定位为 。这种方法依赖于两个过程：领导过程——特别是将领导视为基于领导者和追随者（例如，他们的性别群体）之间共享身份的一种影响形式；以及政治团结，作为动员沉默的多数群体（男性）作为少数群体（女性）的盟友并将平等作为 群体的共同事业来接受的一种方式。在两项实验（ = 338，336）中，我们通过对比将性别平等作为男性和女性的共同事业的基于团结的框架，与女性问题框架（实验1）或精英主义框架（实验2），研究了领导者性别和信息框架如何影响男性和女性对平等的支持。该陈述归因于男性或女性领导者（实验1 - 2），或者此外还归因于政府机构（实验1）。女性报告的共同事业感（实验2）和集体行动意图高于男性（实验1 - 2），并且与精英主义框架相比，在共同事业框架下的意图更高（实验2）。有趣的是，无论框架如何，男性领导者对男性和女性都唤起了更高的共同事业感和集体行动意图（实验2）。然而，无论领导者性别如何，如预期的那样，共同事业框架全面提高了对领导者的典型性、合法性和影响力的感知（实验1 - 2）。但与男性相比，女性在共同事业框架下比在精英主义框架下对领导者的合法性和影响力评价更高（实验2）。我们讨论了女性对平等信息的反应，以及领导与团结对平等的交叉影响。
