This study synthesizes and builds on research about backlash against women in STEM careers (see Martin, 2015), social cognitive theory (e.g., Byars & Hackett, 1998; Lent et al., 1994; Thompson, Peterson, & Kray, 1995) and women’s salary increase requests (e.g., Bowles et al., 2007; Small et al., 2007). Specifically, the study hypothesizes that a three-way interaction (i.e., one between environmental, behavioral capacity, and situational variables) predicts four outcomes for women in STEM. Expanding works on total rewards strategy (e.g., Kaplan, 2007) and other types of compensation women may want more (see Estes & Glass, 1996; Waldfogel, 1998), this study also poses a research question on the types of non-salary compensation women in STEM are offered and accept. Participants (N = 200) were women from MTurk who are in STEM careers, 18+ years old, currently in a full-time job, and experienced with negotiating their salaries before accepting offers for those jobs. Participants completed a 10-minute survey on three independent variables (pre-negotiation encouragement to ask for a salary increase, pre-negotiation experience with asking for salary increase, and pre-negotiation experience with backlash), four outcomes (salary amount asked for, willing to accept, and walked away with as well as perceived likelihood of encouraging other women in STEM careers to ask for salary increases), and demographic questions. The hypotheses were addressed via linear regressions and the research question was addressed via frequency analyses. No support for those hypotheses was found, but multiple sources of pre-negotiation encouragement, types of pre-negotiation experience with asking for a higher salary, and examples of pre-negotiation backlash were uncovered. Multiple benefits women in STEM were offered and accepted were also revealed, supporting the need for salary increase requesters and requestees to approach compensation discussions with a total rewards perspective (see Kaplan, 2007).
Read
