10153 4422

" #5

 

THE INFLUENCE OF SEX BIAS UPON

COMPLIANCE WITH EXPERT POWER

BY

Loraine Son

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTERS OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1978

 

bi

t‘r.

he

f]

CC

fc

de

re

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE INFLUENCE OF SEX BIAS UPON
COMPLIANCE WITH EXPERT POWER

BY

Loraine Son

The present study evolved from the belief that sex
bias creates distortions in perceptions of expertise and,
thus, influences the degree of expert power which the expert
has in relation to the perceiver. Therefore, the influence
of level of expertise, sex of the expert, sex of the in-
fluencee, and sex-domination of the expert's occupation upon
compliance was examined. Separate experiments were conducted
for the male and female-dominated occupations. Subjects'
degree of compliance was measured by their responses to three
recommendations contained in an in-basket. With the excep-
tion of a significant three-way interaction for one of the
three dependent measures for the female-dominated occupa-
tion, a MANOVA revealed that only expertise significantly
affected subjects' degree of compliance. While it is pos-
sible that there are no sex biases, the results could also
be explained in terms of the presence of outside recognition

of competence and legitimate power.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Although there have been many individuals who have
helped me to overcome the difficulties encountered in this
research, I wish to express my warmest thanks to my chair-
person, Dr. Neal Schmitt, for his valued suggestions,
guidance, and the wealth of information he has made avail-
able to me. More importantly, I wish to thank him for his
concern, not only for my education, but also for me as a
person, his encouragement, his honesty, and his patience
despite my constant questioning and demands on his time.

I would also like to express my appreciation to
Dr. Jack Wakeley for his insistence that I express myself
and to Dr. Jeanne Gullahorn for her timely and needed
advice.

Finally, with much love and respect, I wish to
thank my parents for their support, devotion, and faith
in me. I know that they shared in my frustrations, as
well as, joined in my excitement during the course of this
research. I send to them my deepest gratitude for their
willingness to listen and my sincere h0pe that I have left

them with some semblance of sanity.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . .
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . .

THE INFLUENCE OF SEX BIAS UPON COMPLIANCE WITH
EXPERT POWER . . . . .

Expert Power in Relation to Compliance .
Sex Bias in Relation to Expert Power

METHOD . . . . . .

Subjects and Design . . . . . . .
Male-dominated Occupation . . . . .
Female-dominated Occupation . . . . .

DATA ANALYSIS . . . . . . .

RESULTS . . . . . . . .

Experiment 1: Male-dominated Occupation .

Effects of Level of Expertise, Sex of the
Expert, and Sex of the Subject Upon
Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Experiment 2: Female-dominated Occupation
DISCUSSION 0 O O O O O O O O
APPENDICES

Appendix A . . . . . . . .
Appendix B . . . . . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . .

iii

Page

iv

44
44
45
51
56
58
58
60
64

77

97
104

110

 

 

 

Tab

Table

10.

LIST OF TABLES

Means and Standard Deviations of Compliance
Rankings of Alternatives for Each
Engineer Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . .

Means and Standard Deviations of Compliance
Rankings of Alternatives for Each Head
Nurse Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . .

Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrela-
tions of the Engineer Recommendations . . . .

Observed Cell Means and Standard Deviations
for Male-Dominated Occupation Experiment . .

Three-Way Multivariate and Univariate Analyses
of Variance for Compliance in Response to
Engineer Recommendations . . . . . . . . . .

Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrela-
tions of the Head Nurse Recommendations . . .

Observed Cell Means and Standard Deviations
for Female-Dominated Occupation
Experiment 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

Three-Way Multivariate and Univariate Analyses
of Variance for Compliance in Response to
Head Nurse Recommendations . . . . . . . .

Analysis of Variance for Effects of Level of
Expertise and Sex of the Expert Upon Female
and Male Subjects' Compliance to the Purchase
of Throw-Away Needles Recommendation . . . .

Summary of the Significance of the Multi-
variate Effects for Both Experiments . . . .

iv

Page

50

53

59

61

62

65

67

68

70

76

 

Figur

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. Hypothesized Interaction Between Level of
Expertise and Sex of the Expert in the
Male-Dominated Occupation Experiment . . . . 43

2. Hypothesized Interaction Between Level of
Expertise and Sex of the Influencee in
Both Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3. Hypothesized Interaction Between Sex of the
Expert and Sex of the Subject in the Male-
Dominated Occupation Experiment . . . . . . 43

4. Mean Degree of Compliance to Purchase of
Throw—Away Needle Recommendation for
Females and Males Separately . . . . . . . . 72

THE INFLUENCE OF SEX BIAS UPON

COMPLIANCE WITH EXPERT POWER

That some people have more power than others is one of

the most palpable facts of human existence. Because of

this, the concept of power is as ancient and ubiquitous

as any that social theory can boast (Dahl, 1957, p. 201).

Due to its immense importance, many theorists have

directed their efforts toward defining and operationalizing
the concept of power. More importantly, many professionals
associated with the social aspects of existence have
attempted to delineate the sources or bases of power. One
such power base has received much attention because of its
hypothesized relationship to leadership, professionalism,
decision making, and because of its postulated effects upon
subordinates engaged in a hierarchically structured organi-
zation. This particular power base reflects certain attri-
butes of the influencer and has been called expert power
because of its reliance upon the expert skill and knowledge
of the influencer (French & Raven, 1966). More specifi-
cally, French and Raven (1966) state that A'sexpert power is
based on B'sperception that A has some special knowledge,
ability, experience, or expertness.

The essential hypothesis deriving from the accept-

Iance of expertise as a power base is that those who are more

1

 

   
  
  

expert
influe:
this hy
needs c
does nC‘
expert,
perceive

confront

 

lead an

become a.
ation mo.
1123011 the
individu‘
on sex b.
being as
Clarkson
Feather

0' Leary,
5 Jerdee

Sherriff

expert gain more compliance from the targets of their
influence attempts than those who are less expert. Although
this hypothesis appears to be rather straightforward, it
needs clarification. The important point is that compliance
does not depend upon whether or not the influencer is an
expert, but rather upon whether or not the influencer is
perceived by the influencee to be an expert. One is now
confronted with the problem of determining what variables
lead an individual to perceive someone as an expert. It has
become apparent through the emergence of the women's liber-
ation movement that perceived expertise depends not only
upon the individual's purported skills, but also upon the
individual’s sex. More specifically, some of the literature
on sex bias has indicated that women are not perceived as
being as competent as men (Broverman, Vogel, Broverman,
Clarkson, & Rosenkranz, 1972; Deaux & Emswiller, 1974;
Feather & Simon, 1975; Fernsberger, 1948; Goldberg, 1968;
O'Leary, 1974; Pheterson, Kiesler, & Goldberg, 1971; Rosen
& Jerdee, 1973, 1974; Scheinfeld, 1944; Schmitt, 1973;
Sherriffs & Jarrett, 1953; Sheriffs & McKee, 1957; Taynor &
Deaux, 1973; Terborg & Ilgen, 1975; Williams, 1946). There-
fore, it can be hypothesized that a male and a female of
equal expertise do not evoke the same amount of compliance
from others.

Some of the literature from which the latter hypo-
thesis was borne has considered the possible effects arising

from the area or subject matter in which expertise has been

claimed (Deaux & Emswiller, 1974; Feather & Simon, 1975;
Goldberg, 1968; Mischel, 1974). In other words, some studies
have made an effort to look at the effects of sex bias upon
perceived expertise when expertise has been claimed within a
female-dominated field, as well as, when expertise has been
claimed within a male-dominated field. A male-dominated
field is one in which the vast majority of the members are
males, while a female-dominated field is one in which the
vast majority of the members are females. The results of
such studies have been contradictory. Moreover, no studies
exist which have rigorously considered how the sex-domina-
tion of the field affects a male or female expert's ability
to gain compliance in response to expert power. In order to
remedy this situation, this study did not just look at the
effects upon compliance associated with different levels of
expertise and those effects associated with being a male or
a female expert, but looked at the main effects and the
interaction effects of these variables within the context of
a male—dominated field, as well as, within the context of a
female-dominated field.

One other variable which could affect the degree of
compliance gained is the sex of the influencee. Some of the
sex-role stereotype literature has indicated that females
are perceived as being more submissive than males and that
males do not like to comply to a female boss (Bass, Krusell,

& Alexander, 1971; Bowman, Worthy, & Greyser, 1965;

 

Braver:
hypoth
males

as bei
than n
gated.

males,

Misch
1973,
Sherr
Ilger
that
male

sible

the

Stat

Broverman et al., 1972, Fernsberger, 1948). Thus, one can
hypothesize that, in general, females comply more than

males in order to conform to the sex role behavior perceived
as being appropriate. However, whether females comply more
than males in response to expert power has not been investi-
gated. Many studies have shown that females, as well as
males, devalue other females' competence (Broverman et al.,
1972; Deaux & Emswiller, 1974; Deaux & Taynor, 1973;

Feather & Simon, 1975; Fernsberger, 1948; Goldberg, 1968;
Mischel, 1974; Pheterson et al., 1971; Rosen & Jerdee,

1973, 1974; Schmitt, 1973; Sherriffs & Jarrett, 1953;
Sherriffs & McKee, 1957; Taynor & Deaux, 1973; Terborg &
Ilgen, 1975; Williams, 1946). Therefore, it seems possible
that females would comply more than males in response to
male experts, but not to female experts. It is also plau-
sible that sex-domination of the field might differentially
affect the amount of compliance obtained from males and
females. Therefore, in attempting to delineate those
variables which affect the amount of compliance gained by an
influencer who relies upon expert power, this study looked
at the sex of the influencee in relation to the level of
expertise, the sex of the expert, and the sex-dominance of

the field.

Expert Power in Relation to Compliance

 

According to Talcott Parsons (1963), "The same

statement will carry more 'weight' if made by someone with

 

 

 

a high
judgmer
with a
tation
increa
tively
would

EXpert
recogr
the 51
influq
State.
varie
B att
and R
Stren
8'3 X

know]

power
both:
POweJ
ConfC
with
that

the I

a high reputation for competence, for reliability, for good
judgment, etc., than by someone without this reputation or
with a reputation for unreliability (p. 50)." An interpre-
tation of Parson's statement might be that compliance
increases as one's level of expertise increases. Intui-
tively, one expects that an individual of high expertise
would exact more compliance than an individual of low
expertise. This common sense evaluation was formally
recognized by French (1956) who theorized that the greater
the strength of A's base of power over B, the greater the
influence of A over B. Similarly, French and Raven (1966)
stated that the strength of the expert power of A over B
varies with the extent of the knowledge or perception which
B attributes to A within a given area. Furthermore, French
and Raven (1966) hypothesized that B's evaluation of the
strength of A's expertise is based upon a comparison of

A's knowledge with his own or a comparison between A's
knowledge and an absolute standard.

One must necessarily ask whether the use of expert
power leads to attitudinal or behavioral conformity, or
both? In one study, which addressed this question, expert
power was not significantly correlated with behavioral
conformity, but was positively and significantly correlated
with attitudinal conformity (Warren, 1968). It also appears
that expert power may be associated with internalization of

the beliefs of the influencer, as opposed to compliance

or identification. Compliance occurs when an individual
accepts influence because "he expects to gain specific
rewards or approval and avoid specific punishments or dis-
approval by conforming (Kelman, 1958, p. 53)." Identifi-
cation occurs when "an individual accepts influence because
he wants to establish or maintain a satisfying self—defining
relationship to another person or a group (Kelman, 1958,

p. 53)." Internalization occurs when an individual accepts
influence because he believes in the content of the induced
behavior (Kelman, 1958). Kelman (1958) specifically
addressed himself to the tOpic of credibility (expert power
and trustworthiness) of the source as an antecedent to
internalization of the source's beliefs. In manipulating
the base of power of various communicators, Kelman found
support for his hypothesis that the extent to which power
is based upon expertise and trustworthiness, conformity
will take the form of internalization.

Experimentalists have approached the study of the
relationship between expert power and compliance in various
ways. For example, one study attempted to determine
whether or not one's willingness to place an individual in
a position of authority over him was positively related to
the latter's level of expertise (Hollander, 1964).
Hollander asked subjects to imagine themselves as a part of
a group and presented them with a description of an

individual who was characterized as being either an

“extremely capable performer in group's activity," "capable
performer in group's activity," "average performer in
group's activity," or "poor performer in group's activity."
Subjects were then asked "how willing they would be to have
this person in a position of authority in the group." Re-
sults indicated that subjects' willingness to place the
individual in a position of authority was an increasing
function of the latter's perceived level of expertise. Al-
though this study can be interpreted as indicating that
individuals are willing to comply to a perceived expert, it
is questionable whether or not one's willingness to place an
individual in a position of authority over oneself can be
equated with one's willingness to comply.

In another study by Hollander and Willis (1964),
subjects were placed in a two-person group and were asked
to arrive at a group concensus as to the prize-winning
quality of certain pictures. Due to experimental manipu-
lation, each subject was led to believe that either he was
more competent than his partner, less competent than his
partner, or as equally competent as his partner. When the
task was completed each subject indicated on a five-point
scale how influenced he felt he had been by his co-worker.
Contrary to the hypotheses that different levels of exper-
tise yield different amounts of compliance, perceived in-
fluence did not seem to be affected by different levels of
perceived expertise. However, this study suffered from a

severe methodological problem. More specifically, each

subject expressed his Opinion on each picture prior to
learning the opinion of his co-worker and was not given an
opportunity to change his opinion after receiving his
partner's judgment. Thus, the opportunity to be influenced
was not present. In response to this problem, Hollander
suggested that each subject could be influenced by reacting
to the pattern of responses (demonstrated in the co-worker's
judgment of previous pictures) of his co-worker in judging
subsequent pictures. Such an explanation rests on the
supposition that subjects are capable of perceiving a par-
ticular pattern of responses of someone else or are capable
of perceiving the likes and dislikes of someone else.
Attributing the ability to a subject to predict someone
else's response on a judgmental task seems to be highly
presumptious and probably invalid. Therefore, the results
of this study must be interpreted cautiously.

Since experimental manipulations similar to that
used in both of the Hollander studies are not possible in
field studies, experimentalists conducting field studies
have had to develop other methodologies for studying the
relationship of compliance to other variables. For example,
in order to determine why project personnel of an electro-
nics company complied with the requests of project managers,
Thamhain and Gemmill (1974) had project personnel rank
order various reasons which could be used to explain this

compliance. The results of this ranking procedure signified

that project personnel viewed expertise of the project
manager as the third most important reason for complying
with the manager's requests. It should be noted that there
were eight reasons to be ranked. Thus, expertise appeared
to be a fairly important base of power in this organization.
Similarly, Backman (1968), and Backman, Smith, and Slesinger
(1966) conducted field studies in which a ranking procedure
was used. In the former study, faculty members of liberal
arts colleges ranked five reasons according to their impor-
tance in explaining why they comply to the dean. Analysis
of the data revealed that expertise of the dean was con-
sidered to be the most important reason for compliance.
Using an identical ranking procedure, Backman et a1. (1966)
found that expert power was the second most important reason
for compliance of salesmen to their branch managers. Fur-
thermore, they found that the use of expert power by the
branch managers correlated .58 with total control or the
overall amount of influence in the organization. However,
this obtained correlation should not be accepted at face
value since in ranking, one base of power is placed in a
higher position at the expense of the others; i.e., ipsative
measurement. These field studies also only studied expert
power in relation to the other power bases but did not
compare the power of people with different levels of
expertise.

The problem with all the studies previously cited

in this section is that they did not include an objective

10

measure of compliance. Instead of having an observable
measure of compliance in response to the use of expert
power, these studies depended upon subjects' objectively
unverified statements that they would place someone in
authority and the subjects' evaluations of the reasons for
compliance in order to collect data and support hypotheses.
Such a procedure allows for too much subjectivity and, thus,
too much distortion in perception by the subjects. Fortu-
nately, other studies which included actual measures of
compliance have been conducted (Busch & Wilson, 1976;
Crisci & Kassinove, 1973; Evan & Zelditch, 1961; Frankel &
Kassinove, 1974; Horai, Naccari, & Fatoullah, 1974; Moore,
1921; Mulder & Wilke, 1970).

As discussed earlier, expert power has been found
to be associated with attitudinal compliance (Warren,
1968). Therefore, it is not hard to understand why much of
the social psychology literature has dealt with the extent
of attitude change induced in members of an audience as a
function of the credibility of an influencer (Aronson &
Golden, 1962; Aronson, Turner, & Carlsmith, 1963; Bergin,
1962; Horai et al., 1974; Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Kelman &
Hovland, 1953). More specifically, these studies have
compared the amount of attitudinal compliance gained by a
highly credible source or communicator presenting a
persuasive communication to the amount of attitudinal

compliance gained by a low credibility source delivering

11

the same communication. The perceived credibility of a
communicator is a function of his expertise and/or his
trustworthiness (Hovland, Janis, & Kelly, 1953). The
communicator is perceived to have expert power to the
extent that he is considered to be an expert in the subject
matter of the communication, while he is perceived to be
trustworthy to the extent that the message he delivers is
not viewed by the audience as a means of obtaining personal
gains (Hovland et al., 1953).

The procedures of these studies have been essen-
tially identical in that they progressed according to the
following format:

1. Subjects' pre-experimental opinions of a particular
topic were discerned.

2. A persuasive communication on the topic of dis-
cussion was presented to the subjects and was attri-
buted in some cases to a source of high credibility
and, in other cases, to a source of low or medium
credibility.

3. The Opinion of the subjects on the topic was ob-
tained after delivery of the communication.

4. The pre-experimental opinions of the subjects were
compared to their post-experimental opinions in
order to determine whether or not any change of
opinion in the direction of agreeing with the

communicator had taken place.

12

5. The change of opinion obtained under the high
credible communicator condition was compared to the
change of opinion obtained under the low credible
communicator condition in order to determine whether
or not one of these conditions was associated with
more attitude change in the direction of the commu-
nicator than the other.

For all of the source credibility studies mentioned
earlier, highly credible communicators, as compared to low
credible communicators, were associated with more attitude
change on the part of the audience in the direction of
agreeing with the communicator. Thus, it appears that an
individual with a great degree of expertise and/or trust-
worthiness had more power in inducing attitudinal compliance
than a person low on either or both of these qualities.
However, in determining the extent of attitude change a
few weeks after the communication, some experimenters
found that there was a decrease in the agreement of subjects
with the position advocated by the communicator in the
highly credible condition, while there was an increase in
the agreement of subjects with the communicator in the low
credible condition (Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Kelman & Hovland,
1953). The explanation propounded for this result was that
subjects dissociated the source of the communication from
the content of the communication over an extended period of

time, whereby the positive or negative effects associated

13

with the source no longer affected subjects' Opinions
(Hovland et al., 1953; Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Kelman &
Hovland, 1953). Kelman & Hovland (1953) supported this
contention in an experiment in which they reintroduced

the source of the communication to some subjects prior to
allowing them to complete the opinion survey distributed

a few weeks after the communication. For those subjects in
the "reinstatement of the communicator condition," the ori-
ginal result of higher credibility being associated with
greater agreement with the communicator's position was ob-
tained. In view of these findings, it appears that credi—
bility of the source may have effects on immediate attitu-
dinal compliance but not upon prolonged attitudinal com-
pliance. One can postulate that a change in one's attitu-
dinal position would endure if its validity were reinforced
through association with practical experiences.

The difficulty with the majority of the source
credibility studies is that source credibility is composed
of two components, expertise and trustworthiness, and,
therefore, one cannot determine to which of these components
the effects are related. It should be noted that the stu-
dies by Bergin (1962), Aronson et al., (1963) and Horai
et al., (1974) were intended to only manipulate the exper—
tise of the communicator.

Other studies which are not considered to be part

of the source credibility literature have attempted to

l4

look at expertise and relate it to attitudinal compliance
(Busch & Wilson, 1976; Moore, 1921; Mulder & Wilke, 1970).
In one such study, Moore (1921) studied the influence Of
expert Opinion and majority Opinion upon individuals in
three subject areas: speech, morals, and music. Moore found
that the Opinions of an expert in his respective field were
related to change in the Opinions of the subjects, resulting
in agreement with the expert, in all three areas. Inter-
estingly, majority opinion, as compared to expert Opinion,
was associated with more attitude change in the area of
speech. Unfortunately, Moore did not manipulate the level
of expertise in this study.

In Mulder and Wilke's study on participative deci-
sion making (1970), they evaluated the effects of different
levels of expertise. They paired each subject with either
a perceived high expert or a perceived low expert, and
instructed each subject to discuss a particular problem with
his partner and prOpose a solution. Significantly more of
those subjects paired with a perceived high expert, as com-
pared to those associated with a low expert, changed their
original solution and accepted the solution propounded by
the expert. Thus, as in the source credibility literature,
high expert power Of the influencer appears to lead to
greater compliance on the part of the influencee than does

low expert power.

15

Busch & Wilson (1976) also conducted an experiment
specifically designed to compare the effects of different
levels of expertise. In this experiment, subjects listened
to a videotaped communication attributed to either a high
expert insurance salesman or a low expert insurance sales-
man. The communication concerned 1ife insurance and was
basically informational rather than persuasive. However,
it did specify that people should consider buying insurance.
Following the communication, subjects expressed their atti-
tudes toward life insurance in general ("global attitude")
and their attitudes about the specific statements made in
the communication ("message specific attitudes"). Those
subjects in the high expert power condition had a signifi-
cantly more positive attitude toward the specific statements
made in the communication than did those in the low expert
condition. However, no significant difference was found
between these two groups in their "global attitude." As
Busch and Wilson (1976) explained, life insurance is a
familiar topic to most pe0ple, and thus, general attitudes
toward it are not likely to be affected by one communica-
tion.

Although Bergin (1962), Aronson et a1. (1963),
Horai et a1. (1974), Moore (1921), Mulder and Wilke (1970),
and Busch and Wilson (1976) only attempted to experimentally
manipulate and/or study expert power, it is quite plausible

that the subjects subjectively evaluated the communicator's

16

trustworthiness. Thus, the compliance attributed to expert
power could have been partly due to the expert's perceived
trustworthiness. Evidence for this confounding effect was
Obtained from the Busch and Wilson study (1976) in that high
expertise was associated with significantly more trust in
the expert than was low expertise. Furthermore, all of
these studies dealt with measures of attitudinal compliance.
Presumably, attitudinal compliance results in behavioral
compliance since individuals appear to strive for consis-
tency between their attitudes and overt behavior. However,
most of the studies cited did not include a measure of
behavioral compliance. Therefore, it becomes necessary to
look outside of the source credibility literature in order
to see how expert power relates to behavioral compliance.
The study by Busch and Wilson (1976) is the one
study which included both an attitudinal and a behavioral
measure of compliance. As previously mentioned, subjects
listened to a communication which concerned life insurance
and which was attributed to an insurance salesman of either
high or low expertise. Two measures of behavioral com-
pliance to the speech were Obtained. For the first measure,
subjects were to imagine that they wanted to buy life
insurance and, then, to indicate whether or not they were
willing to meet with the salesman, whose communication they
heard, in order to discuss life insurance (behavioral
intention measure). For the second measure, each subject

was asked to place his name, address, telephone number, and

17

an indication of his interest in desiring more information
or a meeting with a salesman on a post card ("behavioroid
measure"). Analysis of the data showed that high expertise
was associated with significantly greater behavioral inten—
tion than low expertise. However, there was no significant
difference in the behavioroid measure for high and low
expertise. In explaining the latter result, Busch and
Wilson postulated that "the behavioroid measure was much
more involving and required the subjects to make a be-
havioral commitment by providing their names, addresses,
and telephone numbers to the life insurance salesman

(p. 9)." The behavioral intention measure was based on a
hypothetical situation and, therefore, was probably not

as involving.

Evan and Zelditch (1961) also Obtained a measure of
behavioral compliance in a study in which subjects were
employed as coders and were supervised by either a highly
competent person, an individual having about equal compe-
tence with the subject, or a low competent individual. The
coding task was manipulated in order that subjects would be
forced to seek help on the task. Results indicated that
there was nO significant difference between subjects in
these conditions in the number of times they called the
supervisor for help. However, subjects in the high expert
condition complied significantly more to the direction of

the supervisor than did those in the low expert condition.

18

An unanticipated result was evoked in an experiment
by Frankel & Kassinove (1974). They attempted to manipulate
the expertise of school psychologists by introducing them
to teachers as "Dr. ___" (high expert) or "Mr., Mrs., or
Miss ____" (low expert). The researchers found that these
two levels of expertise did not result in a significant
difference in compliance on the part of the teachers. As
suggested by Frankel and Kassinove, it is quite possible
that the teachers did not perceive a difference in the level
of expertise because, within both conditions, the individual
was introduced as a school psychologist. Moreover, intro-
ducing both individuals as school psychologists may have
given both of them legitimate power. However, in a very
similar study by Crisci and Kassinove (1973) the "Dr."
gained more compliance from mothers than the "Mr.".

In conclusion, most of the literature concerned
with attitudinal compliance supported the hypothesis that
a high expert can gain a greater degree of compliance from
influencees than a low expert. On the other hand, there
appears to be a paucity Of experiments dealing with the
relationship between expert power and behavioral compliance.
More importantly, those studies which do exist exhibit
some contradictory results. Therefore, in order to aid in
clarifying the relationship between differential levels of
expertise and behavioral compliance, this study used a

measure of behavioral compliance. In view of the

19

attitudinal compliance studies, including the source credi-
bility literature, and most Of the results obtained in the
behavioral compliance literature, it was predicted that high
expert power would result in a greater degree of compliance

than would low expert power.

Sex Bias in Relation to Expert Power

 

As has been explicitly stated, one's expert power
is an increasing function of one's perceived knowledge and
competence. Unfortunately, an individual's perception is
not always based upon Objective qualities of the object of
perception but is susceptible to the subjectively determined
biases and prejudices Of the perceiver. Recently, much
interest has been shown in "sex bias" because of its poten-
tial to distort perception. A major purpose of this study,
therefore, was to determine the effects of sex bias upon
one's perception of another's expertise and, thus, indi-
rectly, upon the ability of an expert to gain compliance.
In fully determining the effects of sex bias upon expert
power, one must consider such variables as the sex of the
influencer, sex of the influencee, and the area in which the
influencer claims expertise. In reference to the latter
factor, one may ask whether a male and a female are able to
gain the same amount of compliance in response to expert
power when expertise is claimed within a traditionally male

or female-dominated field.

20

In reviewing the literature pertaining to the
effects of sex bias upon competence, O'Leary (1974) provided
the following observation:

The findings cited above may be regarded as evidence for
the existence of a societal bias against the recognition
of female competence. This bias may stem from the
belief that females are not endowed with the masculine
attributes which make success more likely (p. 812).
According to Terborg and Ilgen (1975), males are stereo—
typed as being independent, Objective, and able to handle
management and scientific responsibilities, while women are
stereotyped as being gentle, passive, and sensitive. Ter-
borg and Ilgen's contention has found support in many
studies whose purpose was to assess the sex-role stereotypes
held by females and males (Broverman et al., 1972; Ferns-
berger, 1948; Sherriffs & Jarrett, 1953; Sherriffs & McKee,
1957). O'Leary (1974) and Broverman et al.(1972) best des-
cribed the male and female stereotypes emerging from these
studies when they suggested that attributes valued highly in
men constitute a competency cluster, while those valued in A
women constitute a warmth-expressiveness cluster. Further-
more, O'Leary's suggestion that women "share men's bias
against the recognition of competence in women (1974,
p. 814)" also found much support in these studies since
females also prOpounded these stereotypes. However, it
must be noted that some studies indicated a deviation from

the tendency to perceive males as being more competent than

females (Bass et al., 1971; Kitay, 1940; Schein, 1973).

21

For example, the results of a study by Kitay (1940) showed
that women attributed more mental ability to their own sex
than males did. Women's positive feelings toward females'
competency was demonstrated by the fact that 54.6 percent
of the women, while only 21.6 percent of the men, agreed
with the statement, "I have just as much confidence in
women doctors as in men doctors." Bass et a1. (1971) also
Obtained results which were in disparity with the trend to
ascribe more competency to males than to females. They
found that a sample Of male managers and staff personnel
disagreed with the statement that "women don't make good
scientists or engineers because they inherently lack the
mathematical and mechanical skills required." Furthermore,
a factor analysis on all of the items on Bass and his asso-
ciates' questionnaire showed that managers discriminated
the least between men and women on the factor pertaining to
capabilities, aptitudes and worth to business. Finally,
Schein (1973) had male middle line managers rate descrip—
tive terms as to how well they characterized males and fe-
males. She found no significant difference between the
mean ratings for women and for men on expertise factors
(intelligence, competence, and creativity). It can be
hypothesized that the contradictory findings of the studies
on sex-role stereotypes are a result of the fact that most
Of these studies used different items to evaluate stereo-

types concerning competency. Thus, it is quite plausible

22

that each of these items tapped slightly different quali-
ties. Furthermore, competency may have been defined in
various ways by different subjects or may have been subjec-
tively associated with various areas of competence, and,
thus, may have resulted in different perceptions of this
quality for both sexes.

Denial of women's competence was not only evidenced
in the sex-role stereotypic literature but also in studies
pertaining to attribution theory. According to this theory,
performance can be attributed to such factors as luck,
effort, ability, and/or task difficulty (Terborg and Ilgen,
1975). In relating attribution theory to sex bias, it
appears that successful performance by women on tradi-
tionally male-oriented tasks is not attributed to the exper-
tise of the female but to luck (Terborg and Ilgen, 1975).
Terborg and Ilgen (1975) found support for their belief that
sex bias influences the reasons individuals give for ex-
plaining successful performance. They had males assess the
overall performance of male and female engineers and had
them determine whether or not the engineers' performance
was due to ability, effort, or luck. A mean group compari-
son between those males confronted by a female engineer and
those confronted by a male engineer indicated that there
was no significant difference in the degree to which per-
formance was attributed to ability or effort. However, the

performance of female engineers was attributed to luck

23

significantly more than was the performance of male engi-
neers. This finding can be construed as an indication
that, within a male-dominated field, a male and a female
having equal qualifications are perceived as having dif-
ferent levels of expertise. Unfortunately, this study did
not deal with attribution theory within the context of a
female-dominated field. Furthermore, it should be remem-
bered that all the assessors of performance were males.
Perhaps evaluations Obtained from female assessors would
have produced different results.

Taynor and Deaux (1973) conducted an attribution
theory study in which, both male and female subjects were
used as assessors of performance. Each subject was pre-
sented with a story of how a male or female performed in an
emergency situation and was instructed to rate the stimulus
person according to how much effort and ability were
involved in the performance. The stories of the male and
female stimulus peOple were exactly the same. Analysis of
the data showed that females were rated significantly higher
than males on effort but no significant difference was
found between male and female stimulus people On the ability
dimension. However, it should be noted that when the story
described the male or female stimulus person as being accom-
panied by an Opposite sex non-acting person, the male non-
actor was rated as having significantly more ability than

the female nonactor. There was no significant main effect

24

for sex of the subject nor was there a significant inter-
action effect for sex of subject x sex of stimulus person.
Taynor and Deaux's study falls victim to the same criticism
as Terborg and Ilgen's experiment (1975) in that the emer-
gency situation was considered to be male-oriented, and,
therefore, nothing can be deduced about how subjects would
react to males and females executing a female-oriented task.
The problem of lack of data concerning the rela-
tionship between sex bias and attribution theory within the
context of a female-dominated field was remedied by Feather
and Simon (1975) and Deaux and Emswiller (1974). Feather
and Simon (1975) presented female subjects with a story in
which either a female or a male was found to fail or succeed
in a class associated with one of the following professions:
medicine, teaching, or nursing. These fields were consid-
ered to be male-dominated, mixed, and female-dominated,
respectively. The subjects employed a rating scale to indi-
cate the degree to which they felt that the performance was
caused by ability, effort, luck, easiness of course,
echeating, and examiner's error. Analysis of the data showed
that subjects attributed male success to ability more than
they attributed female success to ability, while lack of
ability was considered to be a more important cause of
female failure than of male failure. These findings were
particularly salient when the occupation was medicine. In

general, sex-domination of the occupation did not appear to

25

significantly affect subjects' responses. In attempting to
explain the latter result, Feather and Simon (1975) sug-
gested that subjects may have been focusing their attention
upon success or failure of the individual in his course
work, and may not have been fully considering the sex-domi-
nation Of the field. Another explanation which they ad-
vanced was that perhaps achievement was seen to be inappro—
priate for a female, regardless of the occupation, and,
thus, females were perceived as having less ability than
the males even when the field was female-dominated. It can
also be postulated that male subjects would have rated
particular causes Of performance differently than females.
An attribution theory study by Deaux and Emswiller
(1974) is the most extensive study, as compared to the
studies previously mentioned, in that the experimenters
attempted to evaluate the effects of all three of the inde-
pendent variables, sex of subject, sex of performer, and
sex-domination of the task. The subjects evaluated per-
formance on a thirteen-point scale ranging from luck to
ability. In performing an analysis of variance, a main
effect was found for sex of the performer in that males
were perceived to have more ability than females. Further-
more, a significant sex of performer x sex of task inter-
action effect was found. More specifically, males were
considered to have significantly more ability than females

when performing a traditionally male task, while males and

26

females were considered to be of approximately equal ability
when engaged in a female-oriented task. Therefore, for the
masculine task, the females' performance was attributed to
luck significantly more than the males' performance. There
were no significant interaction effects involving sex of the
subject which supports O'Leary's belief (1974) that males
and females are equally biased against recognizing compe-
tence in females.

For the most part, the results of the attribution
theory studies were congruent with the prediction that a
female's success in performing a task is perceived by both
males and females to be caused by different factors than a
male's success in performing the same task. More specifi-
cally, a female's success was seen by both males and females
to be more often the result of luck while a male's success
was seen more often to be the result of ability, especially
when the task was traditionally male-oriented. One can
hypothesize that if a woman's success on a task is attri-
buted to luck, rather than ability, she may not be able to
exercise expert power since expert power is based on per-
ceived ability, while a male performing equally well on the
same task may have a certain degree of expert power because
his performance is perceived to be the result of ability.

Although the results of the attribution theory
studies provided insight into the effects Of sex bias upon
expert power, more conclusive information can be gained

from those studies in which the performance of an expert or

27

the expert, himself (or herself), was evaluated, rather than
the cause of the performance. Furthermore, the former
studies are enlightening because they ascribed competence to
an individual on the basis of his or her professional status
and/or previous education rather than on the basis of his or
her successful completion of one task, as is the case in the
attribution theory studies. It seems plausible that exper-
tise would be more readily attributed to the individual
whose professional status indicates a mastery of certain
knowledge over a period of time rather than to an individual
who successfully completed one particular task at one parti-
cular time. Therefore, it becomes necessary to review those
articles in which the performance of a professional, or
established expert, and/or the expert himself (or herself)
was evaluated.

In studying the effects of sex bias upon the per-
ceived expertise Of a professional or an established expert
in a particular field, many studies have focused upon the
reaction of female subjects to experts of their own sex as
compared to their reactions to experts Of the Opposite sex
(Goldberg, 1968; Pheterson et al., 1971; Williams, 1946).
The major purpose Of these studies was to determine whether
or not females are biased against experts of their own sex,
as O'Leary (1974) and Scheinfeld (1944) contend. In
addressing this matter, Scheinfeld (1944) stated that women
themselves have internalized the same attitudes males have

concerning women.

28

Women may be the first to mistrust a doctor of their own

sex and where everything else is equal usually prefer a

male doctor. Women lawyers also report that men clients

come to them much more readily than do women, and show

more confidence in them (Scheinfeld, 1944, p. 329).

Support for Scheinfeld's Observations was found in a
study in which urban middle-class women indicated that they
would greatly prefer being treated by an experienced male
doctor, as Opposed to a comparable experienced female
doctor (Williams, 1946). Furthermore, in judging the ob-
jections which patients raised against being treated by a
particular doctor, the majority of the female subjects con-
cluded that protesting against a female doctor was legiti—
mate and natural. Thus, it appears that females do devalue
the competence of female professionals, at least when these
professionals are engaged in a traditionally male-oriented
field. '
More information pertaining to Scheinfeld's remarks

was obtained in a study by Pheterson et a1. (1971). In
this study, female college students viewed eight paintings
and then judged the technical competence, creativity, and
artistic future of each painter, as well as the overall
quality and emotional impact of each painting. For each
painting, half of the subjects thought it was the work of a
male artist, while the other subjects thought it was created
by a female artist. Pheterson et al. also manipulated the
status of each painting in that half of the subjects

thought it was a prize-winning painting, while the others

believed the painting was an entry in an art show. Analysis

29

of the judgments of the female subjects revealed that male
artists were perceived to be significantly more technically
competent and to have a significantly better artistic

future than female artists. A very interesting finding was
that male artists were judged significantly superior to
female artists when the painting was perceived to be an
entry in a show, but no significant difference was found
between evaluations of male and female artists when the
painting was assumed by the subjects to be a prize winner.

In explaining the latter result, Pheterson and his associates
suggested that a female's competence is not accepted until
she has been Officially recognized by outsiders as an expert.
However, due to sex bias, this outside recognition is not
easily obtained. Finally, there were no significant effects
for the dependent variables of creativity, emotional impact,
and overall quality of the painting. In view of the lack of
effects for the latter two dependent variables, it appears
that sex bias was directed at the painter, rather than at
the painter's performance.

Although the articles by Williams (1946) and Phe-
terson et al. (1971) substantiated the hypothesis that
females perceive a male as being more expert than an
equally competent female, they did not indicate whether
this hypothesis is upheld when expertise is claimed within
a female-dominated field, as well as, within a male-

dominated field. The field used in William's study (1946)

30

was medicine, which is Obviously a male-dominated field.
However, the sex-domination of the field of painting, which
was the profession used by Pheterson et al. (1971), is not
very obvious. The results of the latter study may have had
more impact if the experimenters would have ascertained
whether the subjects perceived painting to be a male or a
female-dominated field. Fortunately, the interaction
between sex bias of a female and sex-domination of a parti-
cular profession in which expertise is claimed was thor—
Oughly investigated by Goldberg (1968). Goldberg had
female college students read six professional articles.

For some subjects, the articles were attributed to a male
author, while for others, the same articles were attributed
to a female author within the profession. Each article
dealt with either the field of law, city planning, elemen-
tary-school teaching, dietetics, linguistics, or art his-
tory. Goldberg chose these professions on the basis of
prior testing Of the subjects' perceptions of sex-domination
of various fields. Law and city planning were perceived to
be male-dominated; elementary school teaching and dietetics
were considered to be female-dominated; linguistics and art
history were not perceived to be strongly associated with
one sex more than the other. Subjects rated each article on
its value, persuasiveness, and profundity, while they rated
the author of each article on the dimensions of writing

style, professional competence, professional status, and

31

ability to sway the reader. The latter dimension can be
interpreted as the ability of the author to gain compliance
in response to his or her expert power. The results showed
a tendency on the part of the females to evaluate the male
authors and their articles better on every dimension, as
compared to the female authors and their articles. This
trend was obtained for all the occupations except art
history. Thus, it appeared that females downgraded female
competence when expertise was claimed in a female-dominated
field, as well as, when it was claimed in a male-dominated
field. The latter result did not coincide with Deaux and
Emswiller's finding (1974) that the successful performance
of both males and females on a female-oriented task was
attributed to ability.

The stereotypic literature and the attribution
theory literature lead one to expect that males also devalue
a female expert's performance, and/or the expert, herself.
Although far from being conclusive, evidence of males' bias
against recognizing female competence was acquired from an
experiment performed by Rosen and Jerdee (1973). Male and
female subjects were asked to evaluate each of four super-
visory styles as to their effectiveness when used by a male
or a female supervisor. In this manner, Rosen and Jerdee
attempted to unobtrusively discover whether or not both
males and females perceived a male supervisor as being more

effective than a female supervisor. The results of the

32

study indicated a trend toward higher evaluation Of the
male supervisors, as compared to the female supervisors, but
this difference was not significant. Moreover, there was no
significant main effect for sex of subject nor was there a
significant sex of subject x sex of supervisor interaction
effect. In interpreting these results, one can say that
both men and women shared in the trend to devalue women's
effectiveness as supervisors. However, a methodological
inadequacy must be taken into account in evaluating these
results. The difficulty was that the supervisors were not
evaluated, but rather their styles were evaluated. In
other words, subjects were actually concerned with assessing
the appropriate behavior Of a male or a female supervisor
rather than the overall effectiveness of the supervisor.

A much more elucidative study was conducted by
Mischel (1974). He employed Goldberg's technique (1968) in
that he had subjects evaluate professional articles from
various sex-dominated fields, as well as, their authors, on
several dimensions such as the professional competence and
status of the author, the impact of the article, etc. As in
Goldberg's study, the same articles were attributed to a
male in some cases and to a female in other cases. Mis-
chel's study differed from Goldberg's research in that
Mischel used both male and female high school and college
'students, as opposed to only female college students,
and Mischel only used four occupations, as Opposed to Gold-

berg's six occupations. The male-dominated fields in

33

Mischel's study were law and city planning, while the
female-dominated fields were primary education and diete-
tics. In performing an analysis Of variance on the data,
Mischel found a significant sex of author x sex-domination
of field interaction effect. More specifically, male
authors were evaluated better than female authors for the
male-dominated fields Of law and city planning, while
female authors were considered to be superior to male
authors for the female-dominated fields of primary education
and dietetics. There were no significant effects asso-
ciated with the sex Of the subject. Therefore, in agreement
with Rosen and Jerdee's study (1973), it appeared the males
in Mischel's study exhibited the same biases as the females.
It should be noted that the tendency Of females in this
study to rate female professionals better than male pro-
fessionals across the female-dominated fields is contrary
to Goldberg's findings that females devalue a female pro-
fessional even when her expertise is in a female-dominated
field. However, in analyzing each of the occupations in
Mischel's study separately, it appeared that both male and
female high school students preferred a male author to a
female author in the female-dominated field of dietetics,
while female and male college students did not exhibit a
preference. This latter finding does agree with Goldberg's
results.

All Of the experiments already mentioned have

dealt with the effects of one or more of the variables, sex

34

of subject, sex of expert, and sex-domination of field, upon
perceived competence. One very important aspect of the re-
lationship between sex bias and perceived expertise is
missing from the literature. More specifically, none of the
previously mentioned literature dealt with a manipulation of
the level of expertise. The question which has been over-
looked is, "Does sex bias affect the perception of different
levels of expertise in the same manner?" Fortunately a ten-
tative answer to this question can be deduced from the
results of two studies which dealt with various levels of
expertise (Deaux & Taynor, 1973; Schmitt, 1973). In one
such study, Deaux and Taynor (1973) had male and female
college students evaluate other students who were applying
for a study-abroad scholarship program. Each subject was
confronted with either a high competent male, a high compe-
tent female, a low competent male, or a low competent female.
In evaluating each applicant on the dimension of competence,
a significant sex of applicant x level of competence inter-
action effect occurred. Highly competent males were evalu-
ated more positively than highly competent females, while
low competent males were rated more unfavorably than low
competent females. Furthermore, this evaluation trend was
more evident among male subjects, but there were no signi-
ficant main or interaction effects concerning sex of the
subject. It would have been interesting to know if the
subjects considered studying abroad to be a male or female-

appropriate behavior.

35

Schmitt (1973) investigated the relationship between
sex of subject, sex of expert, and level of competence
within a male-dominated field. Male and female subjects
rated their willingness to be treated by a doctor for each
of four different situations: common cold, appendectomy,
physical examination, and heart defect. The doctor was
characterized as being either a highly competent male, a
highly competent female, a male of mediocre competence, or
a female of mediocre competence. The results indicated a
significant three-way interaction effect for the common
cold situation in that males preferred the mediocre doctor,
while females preferred the competent male doctor. For
appendectomy, there was a significant main effect for compe-
tence and for sex of doctor in that a highly competent doc-
tor was preferred to a mediocre doctor, while a male doctor
was preferred to a female doctor. Moreover, there was a
significant competence x sex of subject interaction effect
in that females greatly preferred the competent male doctor.
For a physical examination, competent doctors were again
preferred significantly more than mediocre doctors. There
was also a significant sex of subject x competence inter-
action effect due to the fact that males preferred a medic-
cre female doctor over a competent female doctor. Finally,
in considering a heart defect, a competent doctor was pre-
ferred significantly more than a mediocre doctor, and a
male doctor was preferred significantly more than a female

doctor. A significant sex of doctor x competence

36

interaction effect was also evident and was due to the fact
that females were neutral in their reactions to the male
mediocre doctor but severely negative toward the female
mediocre doctor. In general, the results Of this study
indicated that females reacted more negatively than males
toward female experts in a male-dominated profession.

As noted continually, different perceived levels of
competence lead to varying amounts Of expert power. Thus,
the next logical step in studying sex bias in its relation
to perceived expertise is to study its effects upon expert
power, or the ability of an expert to gain compliance from
an individual as a result of the former's perceived exper-
tise. As a matter-of-fact, using amount of compliance as a
criterion measure, rather than using evaluations of an ex-
pert or an expert's performance may be more critical in
determining the effects of sex bias. The reason for sug-
gesting compliance, rather than evaluation, as a good cri-
terion is that in evaluation, the evaluator is detached
from the act, while in compliance, the subject is per-
sonally involved. Therefore, in using compliance one
might Obtain stronger personal reactions.

In a study by Rosen and Jerdee (1974), compliance
of male subjects was used as the criterion in response to
advice emanating from a male supervisor or a female super-
visor of equal competence. The researchers employed an
in-basket technique in which male subjects received a memo,

recommending termination Of a subordinate due to performance

37

problems, from either a male supervisor or a female super-
visor. The results indicated that males tended to comply
with the recommendation of the male supervisor more than
they complied with the advice of the female supervisor.

It is Obvious that Rosen and Jerdee (1974) did not
attempt to manipulate level of competence. However, Frankel
and Kassinove (1974) did study the effects of level Of com-
petence and sex of the expert upon ability to gain com-
pliance. As noted previously, Frankel and Kassinove mani-
pulated the level of expertise, as well as the sex Of the
expert (a school psychologist) by introducing them either
as "Dr. ____" or as "Miss, Mr., or Mrs. ____." It should
be remembered that they found no significant differences
between the levels of expertise in the amount of compliance
gained from teachers. The analysis of the data also
revealed that there were no main effects for the sex of the
psychologist and no level of competence x sex of expert
interaction effect. A possible explanation for the finding
of Frankel and Kassinove is that the profession of school
psychologist is considered to be a female-dominated field,
and, therefore, a female psychologist's expertise would not
be brought into question. Furthermore, if school psychology
is considered to be a female-oriented field, this study
indicates that males can gain as much compliance as females
in response to their expertise within a female-dominated

field. This latter possibility agrees with the finding of

38

Deaux and Emswiller (1974) in that the performances of males
and females were attributed to ability when the task was
female-oriented. However, it does not coincide with the
finding of Goldberg (1968) that females devalued other
females' competence even when competence was claimed within
a female-dominated field, nor does it concur with Mischel's
finding that females were evaluated higher than males in a
female-dominated field.

Based upon the literature, the author concludes that
expert power is a viable source of social power, since some
studies show it to be cited as a reason for compliance. As
expected, the results of most of the studies support French's
belief (1956) that an individual of perceived high expertise
gains more compliance than an individual of perceived low
expertise. However, most Of the studies cited have focused
upon attitudinal conformity. These studies have supported
Warren's finding (1968) of a significant positive correla-
tion between expert power and attitudinal conformity. Un-
fortunately, there are not very many experiments which deal
with the relationship between expert power and behavioral
compliance. Moreover, those experiments which do exist
have exhibited some contradictory results. Consequently,

a behavioral measure of compliance was used in this study.

The literature cited also seems to indicate that
the perception of expertise and, thus, expert power, is
affected by sex bias. Both the sex stereotypic literature

and the attribution theory literature indicate a tendency

39

on the part of both males and females to deny female compe-
tence. The devaluation of female competence is especially
salient in traditionally male-dominated professions. There
also exists a great deal of literature dealing with the
relationship between sex bias and evaluation of an expert
or his (her) performance. Generally, the results of these
studies have indicated that both males and females devalue a
female's competence in a traditionally male-dominated field.
Furthermore, females devalued other females' competence in
a female-dominated field. The results concerning males'
evaluation of a female whose expertise is in a female-
dominated field are inconclusive. The deficiency in most
of these studies has been a lack of manipulation of the
level of expertise. It is also evident that there is a
paucity of literature concerned with the effects Of sex
bias on the ability of an expert tO gain compliance in
response to his or her perceived expertise (expert power).
The two studies which deal with the effects of sex bias
upon compliance to expert power indicate that males comply
more to male experts than to female experts within a male-
dominated field. It was also indicated that male and fe-
male experts gain the same amount of compliance from in-
fluencees in a field whose dominance was not determined but
which could very likely have been perceived as a female-
dominated field. Unfortunately, no one has conducted a
study in which the effects due to sex of the subject, sex

of the expert, level of expertise, and sex-domination of the

40

area of expertise have all been studied in relation to

expert power. Therefore, this study was an attempt to look

at all these variables in order to determine if and under

what conditions sex bias augments expert power, and under

what conditions sex bias abates expert power.

In view of the findings cited in the preceding

literature, the following hypotheses seem reasonable:

A. Male-dominated occupation

1.

An individual of high expertise will gain a greater
degree of compliance than an individual of low
expertise.

Of two people with equal expertise, a male expert
will gain a greater degree of compliance than a
female expert.

In order to conform to the sex-role behavior per-
ceived to be appropriate, a female will comply to
a greater degree than will a male.

Based upon the tendency of both males and females

to devalue a female's competence, as well as, the
reluctance of men to comply to a female, level of
expertise and the sex of the expert were predicted
to interact in the manner shown in Figure 1. It
should be noted that this prediction does not coin-
cide with the findings of Deaux and Taynor (1973)
and Frankel and Kassinove (1974). In the former
stance, low expert males were evaluated lower than
equally low expert females. However, the authors
did not determine the sex-domination of the area in
which expertise was claimed and compliance was not
used as the criterion. The Frankel and Kassinove
study, in which no interaction effect was found, was
the only study in this group that used compliance

as the dependent variable. However, the sex- «
domination of the field was again not determined and
it seems plausible that the occupation studied could
have been perceived as being female-dominated.

Not much literature exists on the interaction
between level of expertise and sex of the influencee
upon compliance. However, based upon the stereo-
typic view that females should be more compliant,
dependent, and incompetent than males, the author

41

felt that the females' degree of compliance when
confronted by a high level expert would be exag-
gerated upward. According to French and Raven
(1966), the less one knows in relation to another,
the greater the power of the latter over the former.
Given the male-dominance of the field, females may
stereotypically feel very inferior in their know-
ledge and, thus, allow the high level expert to
exert more influence than males would. The hypo-
thesized interaction is depicted in Figure 2. Con-
trary to this prediction, Deaux and Taynor (1973)
found no significant interaction between level of
competence and sex of the subject. However, their
dependent variable was evaluation of the expert's
competence rather than compliance tO expert power.
Moreover, the sex-domination of the area of compe-
tence was not determined.

Various studies have demonstrated that both females
and males devalue a female's competence especially
when it is claimed within a male-dominated field,
but attribute ability to a competent male (Deaux and
Emswiller, 1974; Mischel, 1974; Taynor & Deaux,
1973). Therefore, one may predict that males and
females would demonstrate equally high degrees of
compliance to a male and equally low degrees of
compliance to a female of equal expertise. However,
based upon the stereotypic belief that females
should be more compliant and upon the arguments
presented in hypothesis 5 concerning the female's
feeling of inferiority within a male-dominated field,
the author hypothesized that females would allow the
male expert to exert more influence than the males
would. Figure 3 displays the hypothesized inter-
action. Schmitt (1973) found that females reacted
more negatively to a female expert in a male-domi-
nated field than did males. However, since the
dependent variable in the present study is com-
pliance, it was predicted that males would react
with as little compliance as the females.

B. Female-dominated occupation

7.

An individual of high expertise will gain a greater
degree of compliance than an individual of low
expertise.

A female will gain the same degree of compliance as
a male of equal expertise. This hypothesis was
based upon the findings of Deaux and Emswiller (1974)
and Frankel and Kassinove (1974).

9.

10.

11.

12.

42

A female will comply to a greater degree than will
a male.

Based upon Frankel and Kassinove's finding of no
interaction effect of level Of expertise and sex of
the expert upon compliance, as well as, Deaux and
Emswiller's finding (1974) that males and females
within a female—dominated field are attributed with
the same level of ability, it was hypothesized that
a female and a male of equal levels of expertise
will elicit the same degree Of compliance. It
should be noted that this prediction is not con-
gruent with the findings of Goldberg (1968), nor
those of Mischel (1974). In the former case, female
subjects evaluated the competence of female experts
lower than that of equally competent male experts
in a female-dominated field, while the Opposite
Occurred in the Mischel study where both sexes
served as subjects.

Not much research exists on the combined effects of
level of expertise and sex of the influencee upon
compliance in a female-dominated field. Based upon
the stereotype of the compliant female, the author
hypothesized that a female influencee would conform
to this stereotype by reacting with a substantially
higher degree of compliance than a male when con-
fronted by a high level expert whereas the differ-
ence in compliance between the two sexes when con-
fronted by a low level expert would not be as
great. The hypothesized effect is shown in Figure
2. This prediction is tenuous because females may
not be as stereotypically compliant when faced with
a situation in which it is appropriate for a female
to be competent. Deaux and Taynor (1973) found no
significant interaction between level of competence
and sex of the subject. It should be remembered,
however, that they did not determine the sex-
dominance of the field and they used evaluation,
rather than compliance, as the dependent variable.

No hypothesis was made concerning the combined
effects of the sex of the expert and the sex of
the influencee upon compliance due to the lack Of
a theoretical base for an hypothesis concerning
the relationship of these two variables within a
female-dominated field.

Degree Of Compliance

 

43

  
 

 

 

 

Male Female
Expert Influencee
O
o
c
m
:3 /4Ma1e
g' //' Influencee
U .
Female u:
///’ Expert 0 .
a
a /
Low High LOW High
Level Of Expertise Level of Expertise

Figure l. Hypothesized Interaction Figure 2. Hypothesized Inter-

 

 

 

Between Level Of Exper- action Between
tise and Sex of the Level Of Expertise
Expert in the Male- and Sex of the In-
Dominated Occupation fluencee in Both
Experiment. Experiments.
8 Female
a ////’ Influencee
F4
a /
O // I,’ Male
0 I Influencee
w:
0
O
m
H
O»
O
a
Female Expert Male Expert

Sex of Expert

Figure 3. Hypothesized Interaction
Between Sex of the Expert
and Sex Of the Subject in
the Male-Dominated
Occupation Experiment.

METHOD

Subjects and Design

A power analysis on pilot data was performed in
order to determine the number of subjects needed to Obtain
a difference between two groups with power of .90 and an
alpha equal to .05. A difference of .5 standard deviations
was considered to be practically significant. The power
analysis revealed that a total of 240 subjects was needed;
120 for each of the two experiments to be described.

The subject sample consisted of 120 male and 120
female Michigan State University undergraduates. An equal
number of subjects and an equal number of males and females
were randomly assigned to one of two experiments: (1) one
dealing with a female-dominated profession, and (2) one
dealing with a male-dominated profession. Thus, there were
60 males and 60 females in each experiment. The independent
variables within each experiment were sex of subject (in-
fluencee), sex of expert, and level of expertise of the
expert (high or low). Therefore, each experiment had a
2x2x2 design with 15 subjects within each cell.

A female-dominated field was defined as being one in

which the vast majority of the members is female, while a

44

45

male-dominated field was defined as being one in which the

vast majority of the members is male. On the basis of these
definitions, the occupations of nursing and industrial engi-
neering were used in this study as the female-dominated and

the male-dominated field, respectively.

Male-dominated Occupation

 

Procedure. Each subject was informed that the pur-

 

pose of the experiment was to evaluate the use of the in-
basket technique as a selection device for managerial posi—
tions. The experimenter also provided a brief description

of the in-basket technique and told each subject that he or
she would take part in this procedure during the experiment.
Subjects were then asked to take the role of a business
executive in charge of production in a large industrial or-
ganization which manufactures automobiles. Each subject was
told that the in-basket included information concerning the
performance and experience of various employees, letters, and
memos which required some sort of response or decision on his
or her part. In further describing the position in which
each subject was to assume he or she was placed, the experi-
menter told each subject to assume that it was one hour
before quitting time on Friday, and, therefore, it would be
possible to plan what to do about each problem, but impos-
sible to carry out all his or her plans before closing.
Therefore, each subject was asked to write his or her plans

for dealing with each situation if such plans were requested

46

on the memo. Finally, each subject was instructed to con—
tinue with the task for one hour, and to read and work on
the material in the order in which it was placed in the
in-basket.

The critical information and memos for the experi-
ment consisted of a staff list, a memo from the personnel
director, a performance evaluation for each of the engineers
concerned with production problems, and three memos from one
of the engineers. These critical materials were inter-
spersed among other memos which were irrelevant to the pur-
pose of the experiment. The information was ordered in the
basket so that the subjects would view the staff list, the
memo from the personnel director, and the performance evalu-
ations prior to reading the memos from the engineer. The
memos from the engineer were not presented consecutively,
but were interspersed among the irrelevant memos. The list
of engineers contained both males and females in order to
manipulate the sex of the expert. Manipulation of the level
of expertise was accomplished through the performance evalu-
ation of the engineers. The performance evaluation con-
sisted of ratings of each of the engineers on three dimen-
sions: knowledge, skill, and experience. For the following
performance evaluation, the knowledge and skill scales
were adopted from two graphic rating scales (Paterson,

1962).

47

Knowledge
("Consider present knowledge of job and of work related

to it (Paterson, 1962, p. 146))."

 

I L L L L
Complete Well Moderate Meagre Lacking
Informed

Skill

("Consider his or her success in doing things in new
and better ways and in adapting improved methods to his
or her own work (Paterson, 1962, p. 148))."

 

l L I _L
Highly Resourceful Fairly Routine
Constructive Progressive Worker

Experience
(Consider past job experience in your company and in
other similar situations).

 

I I L L L

3 or more 1-3 years 3 or more Less than No
years with with this years with 3 years experi-
this organ- organiza- a similar with a ence
ization and tion and 3 organiza- similar

3 or more or more tion organiza-

years with years with tion

a similar a similar

organiza- organiza-

tion tion

The high level expert was rated as having complete know-

ledge, as being highly constructive, and as having one to

three years of experience with this organization and three

or more years of experience with a similar organization.

The engineer who was to be perceived as being of a low

level of expertise was rated as having a moderate degree of

knowledge, as being a routine worker, and as having no pre-

vious experience. At the bottom of each performance

48

evaluation was a multiple-choice question which required
that the subject rate the engineer's overall competence as
either l-high, 2-average, 3-fair, or 4-poor. This question
served as a manipulation check of the engineer's perceived
level of expertise.

The purpose of the memo from the personnel director
was to emphasize the level of expertise of one of the engi-
neers. If the subject was in the high level condition, the
memo stated that the particular engineer was to receive a
bonus for his or her invention of a device resulting in
increased production. If the subject was in the low level
condition, the memo stated that a request for a raise by
the particular engineer was being denied until the engineer
showed some improvement in performance. These memos re-

quired no action on the part of the subjects.

Dependent variables. Each of the three critical
memos from the engineer contained a recommendation. The
recommendations were concerned with a new spatial arrangement
of the production line, the Speed of the assembly line, and
the purchase of new punch press machines. A copy of the
three memos can be found in Appendix A. For each subject,
all three of the memos were attributed to the engineer who
was the subject of the personnel director's memo, and who
was one of four types of engineers: (l) female-high expert,

(2) female-low expert, (3) male-high expert, (4) male-low

49

expert. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of these
conditions.

At the bottom of each memo, the subject was asked to
react to the recommendation by choosing among the five or
six possible responses listed. The subject's choice of re-
sponse served as the indication of his or her degree of
compliance to the recommendation in that the responses were
considered to be parts of a continuum extending from low
compliance to high compliance. This continuum was formed by
having between 26 and 29 subjects in a pilot study rank
order the alternatives for each recommendation from 1 to n
(n = number of alternatives) with 1 being the alternative
which indicated the least compliance with the engineer's
recommendation and n being the alternative which represented
the most compliance. The means and standard deviations of
the rankings for each alternative can be found in Table 1.

As can be seen in Table l, the means generally
increase moving from alternative A to alternative E or F
and, thus, indicate increasing degrees of compliance. How-
ever, the means for alternatives D and E in the spatial
arrangement recommendation indicated that they probably
measured the same degree of compliance. This circumstance
was also found to be true for alternatives A and B in the
punch press recommendation. On the basis of these results,
three continua were formed by associating the alternatives

for each recommendation with an integer value representing

50

 

 

 

km. u m sq.H u m mm. u m sm.H n m mm.H n m
l I I I I mommmum
no.4 n m sm.m u m s.m n m H¢.~ n m ¢¢.m u m gonna mo mmmaousa
wo.H n m ma. u m m4.H u m RH.H n m mm.H u m mH.H n m
I I I I I I OCHQ
mH.m u m mm.v n m mH.q n m ma.~ u m mm.~ n m mh.a n m Ashammma no pmmmm
mm.H u m mo.H n m «H.H n m mo.H n m H4.H u m
mv.m n M mm.m u M Hm.m n W Nw.m n W N n W ucmfimmcmnud HOflummm
m D U m d
mCOwDMOGOEEoomm
mw>flumcumuafl

 

.coflumpcoEEoomm nmmcflmcm comm How
mm>flumcnouad mo mmsflxsmm OOOmHHmEOO mo mGOHDMH>mo Gunpcmum pom msmwzul.a magma

51

the alternative's degree of compliance. The following

continua resulted:

 

 

 

Spatial A B C D,E

I I I I
Arrangement 1 2 3 4
Speed of
Assefibly . § . ? . I
Lin- 1 2 3 4 5 6
Punch A,B C D

I I I I

Presses l 2 3 4

Thus, there were three dependent variables corresponding to
the three recommendations, which were used to measure the

degree of compliance.

Female-dominated Occupation

 

Procedure. The procedure within the female-

 

dominated field was similar to the procedure used within

the male—dominated field. Subjects were told that they were
to assume the role of a hospital administrator in charge of
patient care. Correspondingly, each subject received a
staff list, a memo from the personnel director, performance
evaluations of several head nurses, and three recommendations
from one of the head nurses. The level of expertise was
manipulated by the performance evaluations in the same
manner as that previously discussed. Each performance
evaluation included a multiple-choice question to assess
the subject's perception of the level of expertise of the

head nurse.

52

For subjects in the high expert condition, the memo

from the personnel director stated that a particular head
nurse was going to receive a salary increase due to his or
her excellent performance in the unit. For subjects in the
low expert condition, the memo stated that the raise re-
quested by a particular head nurse was being denied until

his or her performance improved.

Dependent variables. Each of the three memos from a
particular head nurse concerned one of three recommendations:
(1) a change in the criterion for assigning nurses to a unit;
(2) purchase of throw-away needles due to improper steriliza-
tion; (3) a change in the scheduling of bathing the patients.
A copy of the three memos can be found in Appendix B.

At the bottom of each memo, the subject was asked to

react to the recommendation by choosing among four or five
possible responses listed. As before, these responses were
considered to be parts of a compliance continuum formed in
the same manner as those used in the previously described
experiment, except that the number of subjects who ranked
the alternatives for each recommendation ranged between 23
and 28. For each of the three recommendations, the means
and standard deviations of the rankings for each alternative
can be found in Table 2.

Generally the data in Table 2 indicate that the means

increase as one moves from alternative A to the last

53

 

 

 

 

 

mm.H m mm.H u m mm.a m H¢.H m mm.a u m mm.H m am.H m
sm.m m ms.m n m sm.v m o.¢ m sm.m n m mm.a m _mm.m m mpcmnumm mo mcflnumm
mm.H u m «m.a m MH.H m ms.a u m VG.H m mm.H m
I I I I I I mmaommz >m3<
sm.s u m mo.q m sw.m m mm.m u m ~4.~ m as.m m Izouns mo mmmsousm
GN.H m mm.H m oo.H n m H~.H m «H.H m
as.m m m.m m ov.m n m ms.m m m.H m mmmusz no mcammmum
mcoflpmpsmfifioowm
m O>flHMGHOHH¢
.coflumpcmeeoomm mmusz Omwm
comm How mm>flumcumpa< mo wmcwxcmm mocmaamaou mo mcowumfl>mo pumocmum can mCMOZII.N OHQOB

54

alternative on each memo and, thus, indicate increasing
degrees of compliance. Based on this data and the frequency
distribution of the rankings for each alternative, alterna-
tive B of the throw-away needles recommendation and alter-
native B of the bathing of patients recommendation were eli-
minated from the final forms because they did not conform to
the pattern of increasing means. Alternatives C and F of
the bathing of patients recommendation were eliminated from
the final form because, on the basis of their mean rankings,
they appeared to reflect the same degrees of compliance as
alternatives D and G respectively and had higher standard
deviations than D and G. Finally, the mean rankings of
alternatives C and D of the staffing of nurses recommenda-
tion indicated that they represented the same degree of
compliance and, thus, were considered to lie at the same
point on the compliance continuum. As previously, a con-
tinuum was constructed for each recommendation by assigning
to each alternative an integer value representing the
alternative's degree of compliance as determined in the

pilot study. The following continua resulted:

 

 

 

Staffing of Nurses A B C,D E

I I I I

l 2 3 4
Purchase of Throw A B (C)* C D

I I I I I
Away Needles l 2 3 4 5
Bathing of B (D)* C (E)* D (C)*
Patients i i 5 4

55

The responses to these three recommendations served as three
separate dependent variables used to measure compliance.

*The letter in parentheses symbolizes the alterna-
tive in the pilot study which was retained but was asso-
ciated with a new letter in the recommendations used in this
study (See Appendix B). The reassignment of letters to the
alternatives was due to the elimination of various alterna-
tives for reasons previously discussed.

DATA ANALYS I S

Since there were three dependent variables within
each experiment, a multivariate analysis of variance was
performed for each experiment separately, using level of
expertise, sex of the expert, and sex of the subject
(influencee) as the independent variables. Since there
was no criterion such as complexity, importance, time,
etc., upon which to order the dependent variables, the
univariate F statistics were used in determining the sig-
nificance of an independent variable's effect upon each
dependent variable rather than the step-down tests, since
the latter presupposes a logical ordering of the dependent
variables. Three simple contrasts were constructed to
test the main effects and were shown to have the property
of orthogonality. Simple contrasts were also used in con-
structing four other contrasts which represented the three
two-way interactions and the three-way interaction effect.
As is the practice in multivariate analyses, the three-way
interaction effect was ordered last in the analysis,
followed by the three two—way interaction effects, in order

that they could be tested independently of the main effects

56

57

and eliminated from consideration if they proved to be
nonsignificant. Due to the orthogonality of the contrasts
and the existence of an equal number of subjects in each
cell, each main effect contrast was independent of the
other main effect contrasts and, as a result, the order

in which they were placed in the analysis was irrelevant.

RESULTS

Experiment 1: Male-dominated
occupation

 

 

Experimental manipulation. In order to assess

 

whether or not the memo from the personnel director and the
performance evaluations successfully manipulated the per-
ceived level of expertise of the engineers, a t-test was
performed on the subjects' rating of the overall competence
of the engineer who represented the particular subject's
experimental condition, i.e., high expertise-female engi-
neer, high expertise-male engineer, low expertise-female
engineer, low expertise-male engineer. The independent
variable was level of expertise. The analysis revealed
that subjects in the high expert condition rated the over-
all competence of their particular high expert engineer
significantly higher than the subjects in the low expert
condition rated the overall competence of their relevant
low expert engineer, E(118) = 22.998, p < .001. The mean
rating of competence in the high expert condition was 1.07
While the mean rating in the medium expert condition was
3.38. Thus, it appears that the subjects' perceptions of

the level of expertise of the engineer who represented

58

59

the subject's particular experimental condition were

successfully manipulated.

Characteristics of dependent variables. The means

 

and standard deviations of each of the three recommendations
are reported in Table 3. Table 3 also includes the inter-
correlations of the three recommendations. As can be seen,
correlations among the three variables ranged from about .25
to about .36.

Table 3.--Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations of the
Engineer Recommendations.

 

Intercorrelations

 

Speed of Purchase

Standard spatial Assembly of Punch

Recommendations Means . .
DeViations Arrangement

 

Line Presses
Spatial
Arrangement 2.78 1.10 1.00
Speed of
Assembly Line 4.35 1.35 .25 1.00
Purchase of
Punch Presses 2.29 1.18 .28 .36 1.00

 

Due to the moderate level of intercorrelation of these
dependent variables, the use of a multivariate analysis of
variance to assess the effects of the independent variables

seemed appropriate.

60

Effects of level of expertise, sex of the expert, and

sex of the subject upon compliance. The Observed cell means

 

upon which the multivariate analysis of variance was based
are reported in Table 4 for each dependent variable. Table 4
also includes the cell standard deviations. Table 5 presents
the results of the multivariate analysis of variance for
each main effect contrast and the two-way and three-way
interaction effects. In each case, the degrees of freedom
associated with the hypothesis sum of squares was three and
the degrees of freedom for the error term was 110.

The multivariate tests indicated that neither the
three-way interaction effect, nor any of the two-way inter-
action effects reached significance. Furthermore, no sig-
nificant multivariate main effects were found for sex of
the expert and sex of the subject. However, the multi-
variate F for level of expertise did reach an acceptable
level of significance (p < .01) indicating that the high
and the low levels of expertise had differential effects
upon degree of compliance for at least one of the recom-
mendations. In determining upon which of the dependent
variables compliance was differentially affected by level
of expertise, it became necessary to look at the uni-
variate F test for each recommendation with level of ex-
pertise as the independent variable. The results of the

one-way analysis of variance for each dependent variable

are also presented in Table 5.

61

 

 

 

om.H nv.m mh.a mn.v vw. hv.m OHmEmm mHmEmm swam
MH.H mm.m «m.a v.4 ma. mH.m mam: mamsmm swam
om.H mH.m oa.a mm.v om. mm.m wamfimm mam: swam
OH.H ms.~ sm.H m.v mm. mm.m mHmz mama so“:
om. mm.a on. o.v mH.H mm.m mamamm mHmEmm 304
NN.H nm.m NN.H mm.m mm. mm.m mam: mHmEmm 3oq
om.a o.m mm.H N.v OH.H mm.H mHmEmm mam: 304
mm.a >m.m NH.H m.m mo.a ma.~ mam: mam: BOA
m M m m m m nomnnom pummxm mmwuummxm
mommmum cocoa mafia »HQEmmm< psmfiomcmunm mo xmm Mo xmm mo Hw>mq
mo mmmsoudm mo pmmmm Hmwummm

 

 

.usmfiflummxm coflummoooo
omumsflEooanmz How mcofluma>mo pumpcmum can name: HHOU pm>ummn0II.v OHQMB

62

HO. v Na.

.>Hm>fluoommou .coflumosmeeooou mommmum cocoa mo mmmnousm map paw .coflump
IcmEEoomu mafia >Hnfimmmm mo poomm mnu .COHumccwEEoomu ucmEmmcmuum Hmwummm on» mamsvm m>o .N>Q .H>o

m

 

.uouuo mumsvm :mmE onu wumowpcfl mwmonucwumm CH mumnEsz .Ouoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1m4.HC lmh.HV Hmm.v NHH oHH uouum
mv. Hm. mm. H mm. m o x m x «
mm. Hm. MH.H H mm. m o x m
Ho. RH. mm. H mH. m o x a
mo. Hm. mm.H H mu. m m x a
NH.~ mm. Ho. H mm.H m loo Humansm mo xmm
Ho. mo. mm. H HH. m Ame numdxw «0 xmm
mm.~ «OH.~H .HH.sv H «s~.mH m Hal mmHuummxw
mo Hm>mq

m>om ~>om H>om up w mm
muommwm

Omflmwamcd mumHHO>HCD

mmcommwm Cw mocwwameou Mom wocmflum> m0 mwmxamc<

mwmxawc< oumwum>fluasz

.mcowumocoaeooom newsflmcm ou
oumflum>flc2 Ocm mumwum>fluasz zmzlmwunell.m OHQMB

63

The univariate Fs suggested that there was no sig-
nificant difference in the degrees of compliance exhibited
by those in the high level condition and those in the low
level condition for the recommendation dealing with the
purchase of punch presses. However, significant differences
in the degree of compliance for the two groups were found in
response to the recommendation concerning the spatial
arrangement of the assembly line (p < .01) and the recom-
mendation concerning the speed of the assembly line (p <
.01). In the former instance, the mean degree of compliance
in the high expert condition was 3.37 and the mean of the
low expert group was 2.18. For the speed of the line recom-
mendation, the mean degree of compliance for the high and
low expert groups were 4.77 and 3.93 respectively. It
should be noted that in using the univariate Fs as the
determinants of significant effects for each dependent
variable, the results found for one of the dependent vari-
ables may not have been independent of the results found
for the other dependent variables but instead may have been
confounded by the effects of the other dependent variables
since the correlation matrix indicated that these variables
were correlated.

An omega squared was computed in order to determine
the strength of association between level of expertise and
each of the two dependent variables for which significant

main effects were found. The omega squared associated with

64

the spatial arrangement recommendation was equal to .29,
while it was equal to .09 for the speed of the assembly
line recommendation. Thus, level of expertise accounted
for approximately 29 percent of the variance in degree of
compliance on the spatial arrangement recommendation and
approximately 9 percent of the variance on the speed of the
line recommendation.

Experiment 2: Female-dominated
occupation

 

 

Experimental manipulation. An independent sample

 

t-test was again performed on the subjects' rating of the
overall competence of the engineer representing the sub-
ject's experimental condition. The results indicated that
the manipulation of the level of expertise did produce a
significant effect, t(118) = 19.87, p < .001. The mean
rating of competence in the high expert condition was 1.00,
while the mean rating in the low expert condition was 3.28.
Therefore, it appears that the subjects' perceptions of the
level of expertise were successfully manipulated, i.e.,
subjects in the high expert condition rated the overall
competence of their male or female high expert engineer
significantly higher than the subjects in the low expert
condition rated the overall competence of their relevant
male or female low expert engineer.

Characteristics of dependent variables. The means,
standard deviations, and intercorrelations of the three

recommendations are presented in Table 6.

65

 

 

o.H om. mH. mH.H oo.~ mucmHumm
mo mcHnumm
o.H hm. m«.H Hm.~ mmemmz saga
I3OH£B m0 wmwfiohflm
o.H mm. HH.m mmmusz
Ho msHHHmum
mOHomwz
mucwfiumm >m3<ISOH£B mmmusz mGOHHMHbmo mcmoz mcoflumpsoaeoomm
mo mcflnumm mo mmmnouom mo mcflmmmum onwocmum

 

mcoflumaouuoououqH

 

mmuoz ommm may mo mGOHHMHmHHOOHmucH

.msoflumosmfiaoomm
paw .mcofiumfl>mo pumpsmum .mcmszI.m OHQOB

66

As Table indicates, the correlations ranged from
about .18 to about .30. As previously, these intercorrela—
tions indicated that a multivariate analysis of variance

was appropriate.

Effects of level of expertise, sex of the expert,

and sex of the subject upon compliance. The observed cell

 

means and standard deviations are reported in Table 7 for
each dependent variable. Table 8 reports the results of
the multivariate analysis of variance for each main effect
contrast, each two-way interaction effect, and the three-
way interaction effect. In testing each effect, the degrees
of freedom associated with the hypothesis sum of squares
was three and the degrees of freedom for the error term was
110.

The multivariate F tests showed that all of the
two-way interaction effects and two of the main effects,
sex of the expert and sex of the subject, did not reach an
acceptable level of significance (p < .05). However, a
significant result (p < .01) was found for the multivariate
three-way interaction contrast, expert level x sex of expert
x sex of subject. The univariate Fs associated with the
three-way interaction effect were referred to in order to
ascertain the dependent variable(s) for which the three-way
interaction effect was (were) significant. Table 8 also
reports the results of the analysis of variance for each

dependent variable.

67

 

 

 

44.4 mm.m ov.4 mm.m mm. hm.m oamfimm wamamm £04m
mm.H so.~ am.H mm.~ Hm. v.m mHmz mHmsmm amHm
m4.4 mm.m wv.H m.m 4v. m.m madamm 04m: £04m
mm.4 mm.m 4m.4 m.m 4m. v.m 04m: 04m: :04:
4o.4 N.~ om.4 MH.N 4v. m.~ mamfimm OHOEmm 304
mo.4 hm.4 mv.4 mm.m we. hm.m 04w: 04mEmm 304
on. n~.4 mm.4 no.m ow. no.m madamm 040: 304
mm.4 4N.N mm. m.4 vb. hm.m 04m: 04m: 304
m m m m m m
mmaomoz pomnnom pummxm mmfluummxm
mucmflumm >m3¢I3OHSB mmmuoz mo xmm m0 xmm mo 40>04
m0 mcflnumm mo OmOcousm m0 mcflmmmum

 

 

UmpmcfleooIOHMEmm MOM mcoflumfi>wo onmocmum

.ucmswuwmxm coflpmmsooo
pom mammz 4400 pm>umw40un.h mHnme

MC. V my,

.>40>4uommmmu

.GOHumocmfifioomu musmflumm m0 mcflnumn mnu cam .GOHHMUCOEEOOOH mmapmmc >m3m|30Hnu
m0 mmmcousm map .GOHuMUGOEEOOOH momma: mo wcwmmmum on» mamsvm m>o .~>Q .H>QO

 

.uouum mnmsqm some wnu mumowocfi mononusmumm :4 mumnEUZ .muoz

 

 

 

 

 

 

68

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1a~.HV 1mm.HC lom.v NHH OHH uonum
mm.H «wo.s on. H «m~.¢ m o x m x 4
mm.~ mm. mm. H s~.H m o x m
sm.H so.H sm.H H Nv.H m o x a
Hm. mm.m on. H ms.H m m x a
mo. mo. mm. H OH. m lovuowflnsm
m0 xmm
mm. MH. mm. H mm. m lmcuumdxw mo xmm
mm.~ eHo.m 4m.>H H aeo.s m H<meHuumdxm
mo 40>04

m>om ~>om , H>om up w mm
whommmm

mmwmhamcfl outflum>flsb m4m>40sd mumwum>fluasz

 

 

.mcowumocmeaoomm omuoz comm ou mmsommwm :4
OOOMHHQEOO MOM OOQMHHm> mo mmmems< mumwum>flco paw wumwum>HUHss >83I00H491I.m OHQOB

69

According to the univariate F tests, the three-way
interaction effect was not significant for the recommenda-
tion pertaining to the staffing of nurses nor for the one
discussing the bathing of patients. However, a significant
result (p < .01) was evidenced for the recommendation sug-
gesting the purchase of throw-away needles. An omega
squared was computed between the significant three-way
interaction effect and degree of compliance on the needle
recommendation in order to estimate the strength of this
association. It was found to be equal to .05. In other
words, the three-way interaction effect accounted for
approximately 5 percent of the variance in degree of com-
pliance on the needle recommendation.

The mere fact that a significant three-way inter-
action effect existed for the needle recommendation did not
provide any descriptive information about how the levels of
the independent variables interacted to produce this signi-
ficant effect. To provide an understanding of this effect,
the three-way interaction effect for the needle recommenda-
tion was subjected to further analyses. Based upon one of
the independent variables, sex of the subject, the subject
sample was divided into two groups, one consisting of the
female subjects and the other one comprised of the male
subjects. Within each of these groups, an analysis of
variance was performed using level of expertise and sex of

the expert as the independent variables. The results of the

70

2x2 analysis of variance for the female subjects and the
male subjects can be found in Table 9.

In comparing the results for the female subjects to
those of the male subjects, it can be seen that the expert
level x sex of expert interaction effect was not significant
for the former group but was significant (p < .01) for the
males. The fact that the expert level x sex of expert
effect reached significance in one category of the third
independent variable but not in the other category accounted
for the significance of the three-way interaction effect
for the needle recommendation.

Table 9.--Ana1ysis of Variance for Effects of Level of
Expertise and Sex of the Expert Upon Female and

Male Subjects' Compliance to the Purchase of
Throw-Away Needles Recommendation.

 

 

 

 

Female S's Male S's

Effects

9: as P.“ 24.8. 1:
Level of
Expertise (A) l 14.02 7.24* 3.04 1.67
Sex of
Expert (B) l 1.35 .70 .20 .11
A x B l .82 .42 19.84 10.90*
Error 56 1.94 1.82
Total 59 2.11 2.12

 

*p < .01

71

Figure 4 consists of plots of the mean degree of
compliance in each cell and, thus, provides a pictorial
representation of the two-way interaction effects for
female and male subjects. In congruence with the 2 x 2
analysis of variance results, the graph for the female
subjects suggests no significant interaction effect has
occurred, while the graph for the male subjects strongly
suggests the presence of a disordinal interaction. In the
former instance, it appeared that female subjects responded
with a greater degree of compliance to high level experts
as compared to low level experts regardless of the sex of
the expert, and that sex of the expert, in and of itself,
had no differential effects upon compliance. Table 9 sub-
stantiates this graphic interpretation by reporting a sig-
nificant main effect for level of expertise (p < .01) and
no significant main effect for sex of the expert.

The graph representing the mean degree of compliance
in each expert level x sex of expert condition for the males
presents a totally different picture. In this case, it
appeared that male high level experts elicited a greater
degree of compliance than female high level experts. How-
ever, when the experts were of low expertise, female experts
derived more compliance from male subjects than did male
experts. Independent sample t-tests were conducted to dis-
cover whether or not these differences were statistically
significant. The results supported the prOposition that

males in the high level male expert group exhibited a

72

Female Subjects

 

 

 

 

8 5
a i
g H.—
. 4__
r-I
2* 31' Female expert
o v-
o __ :::::::::::::::::::::: Male expert
1H __
o 2_F
e 1~~
u L
8‘
0 Low High
Expert Level

Male Subjects
8 +
s 5
m
"J, 4
% Male Expert
8 3
E 2 Female Expert
8 1
H
m
m
o

Low High

Expert Level

Figure 4. Mean Degree of Compliance to Purchase of
Throw-Away Needle Recommendation for
Females and Males Separately.

73

significantly greater degree of compliance than male sub-
jects in the high level female expert group, E(28) = 2.371,
p < .05. Similarly, the evidence suggested that the needle
recommendation emanating from a female of low expertise
elicited a significantly higher degree of compliance from
male influencees than the needle recommendation received
from a male of low expertise, 3(28) = 2.31, p < .05.

In analyzing further the nature of the two-way
interaction, independent sample t-tests were performed for
the following comparisons: high male expert-low female
expert, high female expert-low male expert, high male
expert-low male expert, high female expert-low female
expert. The only result which reached significance
occurred in the comparison of the high male expert condi-
tion with the low male expert condition. The mean degree
of compliance of those subjects in the former group was
3.5, while the mean degree of compliance of those in the
latter group was 1.9. It appeared that male subjects com-
plied to a significantly greater degree to a recommendation
emanating from a male of high expertise than to the same
recommendation originated by a male of low expertise, 3(28)
= 3.361, p < .01. Two other interesting findings were that
a high expert level female did not elicit a significantly
greater degree of compliance than either a low expert level
male or a low expert level female. As a matter-of-fact,

there was a tendency for the female of low expertise to

74

elicit a greater degree of compliance from males than a
female of high expertise.

Table 8 not only shows that there was a significant
multivariate three—way interaction effect but also that
there was a significant multivariate main effect for level
of expertise (p < .01). The latter result indicated that
the high and low levels of expertise were responded to with
different degrees of compliance for at least one of the
dependent variables. To resolve the issue of which depen-
dent variab1e(s) was (were) differentially affected by
level of expertise, the univariate F tests using level of
expertise as the independent variable were again consulted.
The results of the one-way analysis of variance for each
dependent variable are also shown in Table 8.

Based upon the significance tests of these uni-
variate Fs, it appeared that there was no difference in the
degree of compliance exhibited by those in the high level
condition and those in the low level condition for the
recommendation pertaining to the bathing of patients. How-
ever, subjects in these two groups did react with signifi-
cantly different degrees of compliance in response to the
recommendation concerning the staffing of nurses (p < .01),
as well as, in response to the one proposing the purchase
of throw-away needles (p < .01). In the former case, the
mean degree of compliance in the high expert condition was
3.32, while it was equal to 2.9 in the low expert condition.

For the needle recommendation, the mean degrees of

75

compliance for the high level and low level expert condi-
tions were 2.97 and 2.26, respectively. The strength of
association between level of expertise and degree of com-
pliance was again determined by computing an omega squared.
For the staff recommendation, the omega squared was equal

to .12, while it was equal to .05 for the needle recommenda-
tion. Thus, level of expertise accounted for approximately
12 percent and 5 percent of the variance in degree of com-
pliance on the staff recommendation and the needle recom-
mendation, respectively.

It should again be mentioned that the univariate F
test for one dependent variable was not independent of the
univariate F tests for the other dependent variables since
the correlation matrix suggested some degree of correlation
among the dependent variables. This possibility existed
for the univariate F tests called upon to further analyze
the significant multivariate three-way interaction effect,
as well as, those used to analyze the significant level of
expertise main effect.

A summary of the multivariate results for both

experiments is presented in Table 10.

76

Table lO.--Summary of the Significance of the Multivariate
Effects for Both Experiments.

 

 

Male-Dominated Female-Dominated
Effects Occupation Occupation

Level of

Expertise (A) significant significant
Sex of

Expert (B) not significant not significant
Sex of

Subject (C) not significant not significant
A x B not significant not significant
A x C not significant not significant
B x C not significant not significant
A x B x C not significant significant

 

DISCUSSION

As can be seen in Table 10, the multivariate results
for both the male-dominated occupation and the female-
dominated occupation supported hypothesis 1 and hypothesis
7, respectively. Those individuals who were rated higher on
overall competence elicited much more compliance in response
to one or more of their recommendations than those who the
subjects rated as having a lower degree of overall compe-
tence. These results corroborated the findings of many of
the source credibility studies (Aronson & Golden, 1962;
Aronson et al., 1963; Bergin, 1962; Horai et al., 1974;
Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Kelman & Hovland, 1953), as well as,
other studies which have examined the relationship between
level of expertise and attitudinal compliance (Busch &
Wilson, 1976; Mulder & Wilke, 1970). As proposed by French
and Raven (1966), these findings suggested that expert
power is a direct function of perceived level of expertise,
i.e., those with a higher perceived level of expertise have
more expert power than those who are perceived as having a
low level of expertise.

Although the two experiments reported herein pro-

vided some support for the attitudinal compliance

77

 

78

literature, the measures used in the two experiments were
intended to ascertain the degree of behavioral compliance.
As noted previously, the results of other experiments which
have focused upon the relationship between level of exper-
tise and behavioral compliance have been inconsistent. The
findings of Evan and Zelditch (1961) and Crisci and Kassi-
nove (1973) are congruent with the present studies' findings
in that a high level of expertise was associated with sig-
nificantly more behavioral compliance than was a lower level
of expertise. Busch and Wilson (1976) found similar results
except that the dependent variable was a behavioral inten-
tion rather than a behavioral compliance measure. However,
these researchers also used another measure, Called a
"behavioroid" measure, which according to Busch and Wilson
required a greater behavioral commitment on the part of the
subjects. Whether or not either of these two measures can
be used to support or question the results found in the
{engineering and the nursing experiment is debatable, since
it is difficult to determine if they actually measured
behavioral compliance in response to an influence attempt.
As stated previously, Busch and Wilson intended the commu-
nication presented to the subjects to be informational
rather than persuasive. Thus, from the information pro-
vided in the study, one was not able to discern whether or
not the communicator was actually trying to exert influence.
Moreover, it was difficult to determine what behavior was

supposed to be elicited in response to the influence

79

attempt, if it did exist. In responding to the behavioral
intention measure, the subjects were to assume that they
were interested in purchasing life insurance and to indicate
how likely they would be to discuss life insurance with the
salesman who delivered the communication. On the other
hand, the behavioroid measure was used to determine the sub-
jects' level of interest in insurance. Therefore, these
indices did not appear to be measuring the same dimension.
In short, the ambiguity regarding the existence of an in-
fluence attempt, as well as, its intended consequence, leads
one to question if the behavioral intention and the be-
havioroid measures were actually indices of the degree of
behavioral compliance elicited by an influence attempt.
Frankel and Kassinove (1974) also found that level
of expertise had no differential effects upon behavioral
compliance. As previously described, Frankel and Kassinove
attempted to manipulate the level of expertise, and conse-
quently the expert power, of school psychologists by intro-
ducing them to teachers as Dr. _____ (high expert) or Mr.,
Miss, or Mrs. ____ (low expert). The researchers offered a
plausible explanation for the lack of an expert power main
effect by stating that their manipulation of expertise may
have been inadequate and may also have been confounded by
the presence of legitimate power. Both of these problems
were hypothesized to have occurred because in both the high

expert power and low expert conditions, the individual was

80

introduced as being a school psychologist. This title may
have granted the individuals equal levels of perceived ex-
pertise regardless of whether or not the psychologist was a
Ph.D. Furthermore, the position of school psychologist
probably has a certain amount of legitimate power accruing
to it, and the teachers may have been partially reacting to
this power source. If legitimate power, rather than expert
power, was the factor in determining the teachers' com-
pliance, both psychologists would have been expected to
have elicited the same amount of compliance from the
teachers since they would have had an equal amount of legi-
timacy. The two experiments reported herein did not suffer
from these methodological problems. As indicated by the
subjects' overall competence ratings, the manipulation of
the level of expertise was successful in that the high
expert engineer and nurse were perceived as having a greater
degree of expertise than the low expert engineer and nurse,
respectively. Furthermore, the expert power manipulation
was not confounded by the presence of legitimate power since
the experts were trying to elicit compliance from someone
whose position in the hierarchy was higher than the position
of the experts. Therefore, neither the engineers nor the
nurses had any legitimate power with respect to the
influencee.

At first glance, the results of both experiments

appear to contradict Warren's findings (1968) that the

81

presence of expert power was not related to behavioral con-
formity, but was positively and significantly related to the
presence of attitudinal conformity. Actually, the supposed
difference in results found between the engineering and
nursing experiments and those reported by Warren can be re-
conciled quite easily. Both attitudinal and behavioral
conformity manifest themselves through behavioral compliance.
The way to distinguish between these two types of conformity
is not only to measure behavioral compliance but also to
establish whether or not a change in attitude has accompanied
the behavioral compliance. In the engineering and nursing
experiments, no measure of attitude change was performed and,
thus, it was impossible to establish whether the observed
behavioral compliance was simply the result of behavioral
conformity or a manifestation of attitudinal conformity. If
one accepts Warren's results, one would be inclined to
espouse the latter stance.

Although the results indicated that level of exper-
tise had an effect upon the degree of compliance elicited
from an influencee, these findings must be interpreted
cautiously. This result could have been due to an idiosyn-
cracy of the memo used in this in-basket. More specifi-
cally, subjects in the low expert condition may have felt
that their engineer or nurse had an ulterior motive in
making the recommendations. As stated in a memo from the
personnel director, the low level expert had been denied a

salary increase until his or her performance improved. The

 

 

sul
th"
an;

IE

fi:
10'
va;
al
se;
mi
ca
imj
th
th
in
ex
1e

qt;

ex

0b

 

 

 

82

subjects may have felt that by making three recommendations
the low level experts were merely trying to obtain a raise
and, as a result, may have reacted negatively. One other
reason for caution stems from Busch and Wilson's finding
(1976) that a high level of expertise resulted in a signi-
ficantly greater degree of trust in the expert than did a
lower level of expertise. This result suggests that these
variables may be positively related to each other. Gener-
ally, the source credibility studies have not attempted to
separate these variables from each other in order to deter-
mine their independent effects upon compliance. Theoreti-
cally, it is feasible that level of expertise does not
impact upon compliance directly but, instead, influences
the expert's perceived trustworthiness, which then affects
the amount of compliance obtained, i.e., trust is an
intervening variable in the relationship between level of
expertise and compliance. Until the relationship between
level of expertise and trust is fully elucidated, one must
question whether or not the results of the male-dominated
and female-dominated experiments indicate that level of
expertise directly influences the degree of compliance
obtained.

The omega squared calculated for the relationship
between level of expertise and each of the recommendations
for which this independent variable was significant indi-

cated that it accounted for 29 percent, 9 percent, 12

83

percent, and 5 percent of the variance on the spatial
arrangement recommendation, the speed of the assembly line
recommendation, the staffing recommendation, and the needle
recommendation, respectively. According to Cohen's cri-
terion (1969) the omega squared of 29 percent is represen-
tative of a large size effect, while an omega squared of

9 percent and one of 12 percent are indicative of a medium
size effect. In other words, as compared to the size of
the correlations found in the behavioral sciences, these
results represented a relatively strong relationship
between level of expertise and compliance as measured on
the spatial arrangement, speed of the assembly line, and
staffing recommendations. Cohen associates a small size
effect with an r2 equal to .01 and a medium size effect
with an r2 of .09. Therefore, when 5 percent of the
variance is accounted for, as is the case in the needle
recommendation, one would probably classify this result as
a small size effect and would certainly consider it to be
practically significant.

In the male-dominated occupation experiment, hypo-
thesis 2, which postulated that a male expert would have
more expert power, i.e., gain a greater degree of compli-
ance, than a female of equal expertise was not supported.
This result was puzzling since much of the evidence accu-
mulated over a series of studies concerning sex bias

showed a tendency on the part of males, as well as, females,

84

to avoid attributing competency to a female, especially when
her expertise was claimed in a male-dominated field (Brover-
man et al., 1972; Deaux & Emswiller, 1974; Feather & Simon,
1975; Fernsberger, 1948; Goldberg, 1968; Sherriffs &
Jarrett, 1953; Sherriffs & McKee, 1957; Taynor & Deaux,
1973). Furthermore, Rosen and Jerdee (1974) found that
males complied to the recommendation of a male supervisor

to a greater extent than to a female supervisor when they
recommended that an employee be terminated due to perform-
ance problems.

Hypothesis 4 which predicted the occurrence of a
significant interaction effect between level of expertise
and sex of the expert was also disconfirmed. This hypo-
thesis was prompted by the expectation that the perception
of the expertise of a very competent engineer would be
exaggerated upward by the fact that the engineer was a
male, while the perception of the expertise of a competent
female engineer would be downgraded. These expectations
were particularly compelling because they served to rein-
force the stereotypic view that males are competent and
females are incompetent, especially in a male-dominated
field. Some support for these beliefs was derived from an
attribution theory study in which ability was considered
to be a more important cause of male success than female
success, while lack of ability was cited as a more important
cause of female failure than of male failure (Feather &

Simon, 1975).

85

A possible explanation for the failure of hypo-
thesis 2 and hypothesis 4 to gain support can be found in
the results and discussion presented by Pheterson et al.
(1971). They found that when female subjects were presented
with paintings which were entered in a contest, the females
judged the male painters to have more technical competence
than the female painters. However, those subjects who were
told that the paintings had been winners in a contest judged
the technical competence of the male and female painters to
be equivalent. The explanation proposed by Pheterson and
his associates was that females will be judged to be as
competent as men only when the females receive special dis-
tinction. As stated in a previous section, it would appear
that peOple, or at least women, are more prone to acknow—
ledge a woman's expertise when the existence of that exper-
tise has been established by an outside source. In
relating Pheterson et al.'s findings to the present experi-
ment, it should be recalled that the in-basket used in the
present experiment contained supervisory performance evalu-
ations of the engineers and a memo from the personnel
director concerning the engineer's performance. In manipu-
lating the level of expertise in this manner, the female
engineers received outside recognition of their competence.
On the basis of Pheterson et al.'s findings concerning the
effects of outside recognition, one would expect the male
and female engineers to have been perceived as being of

equal competence and, therefore, as having the same amount

86

of expert power. Under such conditions, one would anti-
cipate the nonsignificance of the sex of expert effect and
the level of expertise by sex of expert effect found in
this study.

Hypothesis 3 which postulated that females would
comply more than males and hypothesis 5 which predicted a
level of expertise x sex of subject interaction effect also
found no support in the data. Both hypotheses were borne
out of the sex-role stereotypic belief that females should
behave more submissively than males. In 1972, Broverman
et a1. (1972) found that this belief was still a part of
the sex-role norms held by both men and women. The lack of
significant effects with respect to hypotheses 3 and 5 can
possibly be understood if one considers the role which the
subjects were asked to assume. By asking the male and
female subjects to assume that they were production mana-
gers, they were placed in a position of power and, more
importantly, they were automatically given legitimate power
with respect to the engineers. More specifically, the
female subjects, as well as, the male subjects were given
the impression that they were not expected to play a sub-
missive role but were expected to take charge of their
department. Assuming that the subjects adopted the norma-
tive behavior accruing to the role of production manager,
one would not expect the females to comply more than the

males in this context.

87

Hypothesis 6, which suggested that there would be
a significant interaction effect between sex of the in-
fluencee and sex of the expert was not confirmed. The an-
ticipation of an interaction effect was based on the belief
that females would comply more than males in response to a
male expert but that they would display the same degree of
non-compliance in response to a female expert. The former
premise was based on the stereotypic belief that it is
appropriate for females to be more submissive than males,
while the belief that males and females would be equally
noncompliant to a female expert was based on the previously
cited literature indicating that both males and females
devalue the competence of women. However, as previously
discussed, the stereotypic notion pertaining to the greater
submissiveness of females as compared to males and the
devaluation of a female's competence may not have had the
opportunity to Operate in this study. In the absence of
these variables, one would not expect a significant sex of
influencee x sex of expert interaction effect.

Although no hypotheses concerning a multivariate
three-way interaction effect were formed, this analysis
was performed. The results proved to be nonsignificant.

Within the female-dominated field, the verification
of hypothesis 7 was already discussed. The multivariate
results also supported hypothesis 8 in that there was no

significant difference in the compliance gained by a male

88

and a female of equal expertise. This hypothesis was
derived from and is congruent with the findings of Deaux
and Emswiller (1974), and Frankel and Kassinove (1974).

In the former study, subjects attributed the same degree

of ability to a male and a female who had performed a
feminine task. Frankel and Kassinove found no difference
in the amount of behavioral compliance gained by female

and male school psychologists. However, the interpretation
of these results is more tenuous than those of Deaux and
Emswiller because Frankel and Kassinove did not determine
whether school psychology was perceived to be a male or a
female-dominated field. The results of the present study
as well as those of Deaux and Emswiller lead one to con-
clude that the sex of the expert within a female-dominated
field does not have any effect upon the expert power of the
individual. However, within a male-dominated field, it
appears that a male has more expert power than a female
unless the female obtains outside recognition.

The interpretation of the findings concerning sex
of the expert in the female-dominated field must be viewed
with caution since the findings of Goldberg (1968) and
Mischel (1974) contradict those of the present study, as
well as, those of Deaux and Emswiller (1974) and Frankel
and Kassinove (1974). Goldberg found a trend for females
to judge males as being more competent than females in a
female-dominated field, while Mischel found the opposite

to be true to some degree. None of Goldberg's results

89

for the female-dominated occupations were significant.
Apparently, different conclusions can be drawn from the
results of each of these studies. One possible explanation,
which deserves further analysis, is that those experts in
the present study, the Deaux and Emswiller study, and the
Frankel and Kassinove experiment received more objective
indications or outside recognition of their expertise as
compared to the experts in the Goldberg and Mischel studies.
If this possibility existed, the lack of a significant
effect may have been due to the presence of outside recog-
nition as in the male-dominated field, rather than to a
tendency of people to view males and females as being
equally competent in a female-dominated field.

Hypothesis 10 which stated that there would be no
significant interaction between level of expertise and sex
of the expert was also confirmed by the multivariate
analysis. The prediction was based on the assumption that
sex of the expert would not have different effects upon the
perception of high and low levels of expertise within a
female-dominated field. The findings were congruent with
those obtained by Frankel and Kassinove (1974). As in the
experiment pertaining to the male-dominated occupation,
these results could have been due to the presence of outside
recognition of the competence of both male and female
nurses.

Hypotheses 9 and 11 which postulated a main effect

for sex of the subject and a significant level of expertise

90

x sex of influencee effect, respectively, were unsubstan-
tiated. As in the male-dominated occupation experiment,
both of these hypotheses evolved from the sex-role stereo-
typic literature which indicated that females are perceived
as being more submissive than males. These predictions
may not have been verified for the same reasons that they
were not supported in the study of the male-dominated
occupation (see page 86). On the other hand, the results
could indicate that within a female-dominated field,

women do not feel obligated to conform to the sex-role
norm of being more compliant than males, and are confident
in their own Opinions.

No prediction was made concerning tne lHteLdCtlun
between sex of the expert and sex of the subject. In the
present study, the interaction effect was nonsignificant.
Based upon this study, it appears that within a female-
dominated field, the relative degrees of compliance of
men and women do not differ with respect to the sex of the
expert.

A multivariate test of the three-way interaction
effect was also performed on the data from the nursing
recommendations. Contrary to the findings in the engi-
neering experiment, the three-way interaction effect was
found to be significant. The univariate F tests indicated
that this interaction effect reached significance only for
the recommendation pertaining to the purchase of throw-away

needles. The omega squared indicated that the three-way

91

interaction effect accounted for approximately 5 percent of
the variance in the responses to the needle recommendation.
In applying Cohen's criterion (1969) to this result, one
would be inclined to classify the finding as a small size
effect and would consider it to be practically significant.
The nature of this effect seems to decry most of
the theories prOposed to explain the results of the main
and two-way interaction effects presented earlier in this
discussion. It appeared that for this one recommendation,
a significant level of expertise x sex of expert interaction
was found for male subjects but not for female subjects.
The female subjects reacted as predicted, i.e., sex of the
expert within a female-dominated field did not affect one's
perceived level of expertise and, thus, one's expert power.
On the other hand, males displayed a significantly greater
degree of compliance in response to a highly expert male as
compared to a highly expert female. However, when the
experts were perceived to have lower levels of expertise,
the males complied significantly more to a female than to a
male expert. Apparently, the proposition that outside
recognition of both the male's and female's competence would
result in the sexes being perceived as having equal levels
of expertise was not operating in this case. Furthermore,
the author's contention that sex of the expert within a
female-dominated field has no effect upon the perceived

level of expertise of the individual (see explanation of

92

Hypothesis 8) must be questioned in light of the findings
for the male subjects. The results found for the male
subjects in this study coincide with those found by Deaux
and Taynor (1973) for both male and female subjects. It is
plausible that the low expert male elicited less compliance
than the low expert female because the former's lack of
competence did not correspond to the male stereotype. If
male subjects considered the field of nursing to be one in
which not much expertise was required to perform well,
especially since females can perform it well, the male sub-
jects may have found it particularly degrading that a male
could not excel in the field. This attitude could have led
the male subjects to devalue the low expert male more than
the low expert female. The occurrence of more compliance
in response to a high expert male than in response to a
high expert female could possibly have been due to the con-
tent of the recommendation. The content of the needle
recommendation as compared to the other head nurse recommen-
dations implied more of a supervisor-subordinate relation-
ship between the head nurse and the other nurses on the
floor in that the head nurse was looking over and evalu-
ating the nurses' performance. Perhaps the male subjects
viewed this supervisory role as being more appropriate for
the male head nurse of high expertise rather than the
female head nurse of high expertise. Moreover, if the

perception of a supervisor-subordinate relationship existed,

93

the males subjects may have been more inclined to comply
to a male supervisor than a female supervisor (Rosen &
Jerdee, 1974).

A few other unanticipated and interesting relation-
ships emerged from the interaction effect found within the
male subject group. For example, a female of high expertise
did not elicit significantly more compliance from male sub-
jects than did a male or a female of low expertise. To
further complicate the issue, a male head nurse of high
expertise did not obtain a significantly greater degree of
compliance than did the low expert level female. The author
could not offer any solid foundation for these results but
suggests that the presence of intervening variables be
investigated. Apparently, more research is needed to
unravel these findings.

From the overall results obtained in the two experi-
ments, it appeared that with only one exception, one's
expert power was not affected by one's sex nor the sex Of
the influencee. Moreover, sex bias did not appear to be
Operative in a traditionally male field nor, for the most
part, in a traditionally female field. These results were
not congruent with many of those found in the attribution
theory literature nor with those found in the studies
which required a subject to evaluate the competence of a
male and/or a female. Several variables, such as the

presence of outside recognition, have been discussed in the

94

previous paragraphs to account for these discrepancies.
Unless these variables are controlled in future studies,
one will not be able to conclusively prove whether or not
sex bias exists in determining one's expert power. Fur-
thermore, until these variables are controlled, one cannot
ascertain if sex bias exists more strongly in relation to
determining one's expert power than in relation to evalu-
ation of one's perceived level of expertise.

The adequacy of the in-basket technique to assess
the existence and influence of sex bias upon expert power
is also debatable. Perhaps it should only be applied to
the situation in which either the influencee or the expert
is first entering the organization. In such a situation,
the influencee has not had personal contact with and is
not personally aware of the expert's competence and may,
therefore, fall back on sex-role stereotypes to make a
decision (Rosen & Jerdee, 1974). This lack of contact and
personal knowledge of the expert was representative of the
situation in the in—basket experiment. It can be postulated
that as the influencee gains first hand experience with the
performance of an expert, sex bias would not play any role
in determining the latter's expert power in relation to
the influencee.

The final question which must be posed is, "What
are the implications of this study?" An Optimist might
interpret the results as a sign that the societal modes

concerning sex-role stereotyping of jobs are becoming

95

obsolete. The door would appear to be open for both men
and women to enter an occupation not traditionally asso-
ciated with their sex and have their suggestions judged
on the basis of merit rather than upon the originator's
sex. The author, although not a pessimist, is not willing
to conclude that sex bias is well on its way to being
eliminated in the occupational world. After all, many of
the studies reporting the existence of sex bias in relation
to various occupations were not performed too long ago and
society's beliefs and prejudices do not change that rapidly.
Still, the fact remains that sex bias was found to exist
in only one instance in this study. The author contends,
as did Pheterson et al. (1971), that an expert engaged in
solving a problem will experience sex bias in the evaluation
of his or her ideas unless a third party is available to
testify to the expert's competence. In other words, the
establishment of an individual's competence does not lie in
his or her own hands but is dependent upon one's finding
an outside source, who is credible, not sexually biased,
and willing to publicly deny societal mores in stating
that a particular individual working in a non-traditional
sex-role is competent. In view of the pervasiveness of
sex bias, as found in previous studies, such individuals
would be difficult to find.

Perhaps, as stated in an earlier paragraph, sex

bias would not play a dominant role in determining one's

96

expert power if the influencee is in a position to View
physical, Objective evidence of an expert's success. Cer—
tainly, such an occurrence would cause cognitive dissonance.
However, the resolution of such dissonance may not result
in the abolition of one's sex bias but instead may come
about by attributing the expert's performance to luck. A
possible research project would be to determine how long an
individual would be inclined to attribute one's performance
to luck in the face of continuing successful performance on
the part of the expert and to determine how dissonance
would be resolved if the attribution of luck to explain
performance no longer seemed feasible.

Finally, even if an expert's competence is somehow
proven to another individual, the latter may be inclined
to privately admit to an expert's competence when that
competence is claimed within an occupation not congruent
with the expert's sex, but will the individual be willing
to publicly conform to the expert's advice? It seems plau-
sible that if one's peers were sex—biased, one would not
comply in order to conform to the group's norms. In the
in-basket technique used in this study, public compliance
was not necessary. Perhaps a laboratory experiment of this
nature affords an influencee the opportunity to be ideali-
stic in his or her responses whereas the outside world has
at its disposal more negative consequences for such com-
pliance and is, thus, able to perpetuate the existence of

sex bias in the occupational world.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

THE EASTFIELD COMPANY

November 19, 1976

Dear :

 

In response to the need to locate a means for in-
creasing our production, I have come to the conclusion
that the present spatial arrangement of the production line
is inadequate and a deterrent to obtaining a satisfactory
level of production. My data indicates that production is
110 units per day. Based upon my knowledge, I have devised
a new spatial arrangement of the production line which,
according to my calculations, will lead to a 20% increase
in production flow and will result in a production of 150
units per day. Many of the employees may not be very
satisfied with this new arrangement since it may separate
them from their friends. However, my data indicates that
the company will lose $10,000.00 for each day in which it
operates under the present spatial arrangement. Therefore,
in my opinion, any delay in implementing this change will
be costly to the company. The implementation of this plan
is waiting for your go ahead.

Sincerely,

97

98

Based upon your opinion of this engineer's knowledge and

experience, as well as the nature of the problem, what

action would you take in deciding whether or not to go

along with this engineer's suggestion?

A.

In questioning whether or not the engineer's data
is accurate and in questioning the validity of this
person's argument, I would postpone any action or
decision for a few weeks in order that another
study could be conducted and more data collected.

Based upon the data and the opinion of this engi-
neer, I would present this engineer's plan at the
regularly scheduled monthly meeting of the engi-
neers and obtain everyone's opinion before I would
take this engineer's advice.

In considering this engineer's estimation of a
$10,000.00 per day loss to be accurate, I would
not wait until the monthly meeting but would call
a special meeting of the engineers on Wednesday
to obtain their opinions before I would take this
engineer's advice.

With the intention of taking this engineer's
advice to implement the new spatial arrangement,
I would ask this person to set up an appointment
on Monday morning to discuss his or her data and
to answer several questions.

In accepting the engineer's estimation of a
$10,000.00 per day loss and in considering this
engineer to be totally competent, I would call him
or her before closing today to say that I approve
of the recommendation and give the engineer my
full support in implementing his or her spatial
arrangement as soon as possible.

99

THE EASTFIELD COMPANY

November 19, 1976

Dear :

 

As I am sure you are aware, the speed at which the
assembly line Operates is based upon the results of our
time-motion studies, and results in the production of 8
cars per minute. Although these studies show that an
assembly line worker is physically capable of performing
his job at the present speed at which the line is moving,
it has become apparent that the quality of the work has
deteriorated to the point where the number of rejects has
increased to 25%. Based upon my knowledge of these matters,
I believe that the poor quality is due to the resentment
of the workers toward the present speed of the line. From
my vieWpoint and my own interpretation Of data reported in
various journals, attempting to motivate these employees to
produce better quality products by Offering bonuses or more
time-Off will not work. Therefore, I recommend a 15%
decrease in the speed of the line. According to my data
this decrease would lead to a decrease in the quantity of
the work to 6.5 cars per minute, but I believe it would lead
to an increase in the quality of the work, a decrease in the
rejection rate to 7%, and an increase in employee morale.

It is my belief that the company cannot tolerate the
present rate Of rejects for a very long time and, there-

fore, I recommend that a decision be made as soon as

100

possible. I realize that this change requires the approval
of the board and that the monthly board meeting is on
Thursday. Therefore, I am presenting you with the following
data which I collected and interpreted to present at the

board meeting. You will find that this data supports my

 

 

recommendation.
Sincerely,
Present Speed Production Dollar Value
6 cars/minute $35,000.00/minute
25% rejects -$ 8,750.00/minute

(2 cars/minute)

 

$26,250.00/minute

 

 

 

New Speed Production Dollar Value
6.5 cars/minute $28,438.00/minute
7% rejects -$ 2,012.00/minute
(.46 cars/minute)
$26,426.00/minute
employee morale + unknown quantity

Based upon your opinion of this engineer's knowledge and
experience, as well as the fact that the board meeting is
on Thursday, what action would you take in deciding whether
or not to go along with this engineer's suggestion?

A. Since the results of our previous time-motion
studies indicated that a worker is physically
capable of working at the present speed, I would
not consider this engineer's evaluation of the
situation to be correct nor would I go along with
his or her recommendation to change the speed of
the line.

101

I would seriously consider the possibility that the
engineer's data upon which the above figures are
based may be incorrect and would therefore not
mention it at this monthly board meeting but would
wait for a few weeks until another study could be
conducted.

In accepting the engineer's conclusion that a high
rate of rejects does exist and that it is due to
the resentment of the workers, I would attempt to
motivate the employees rather than accept the
engineer's opinion that this method will not work
and that we should reduce the speed of the line.

In accepting the engineer's evaluation of the prob-
lem and in considering the recommendation that the
speed of the line be reduced, I would call a meeting
of the other engineers and obtain their opinions
concerning a change in the speed of the line before
I would take this person's advice. Only if they
unanimously agreed, would I mention the recommenda-
tion at the board meeting.

I would have the engineer who Obtained this data
make an appointment for Monday morning in order to
discuss the data. Based on this person's sug-
gestion, I would mention this recommendation at
the board meeting but would not take a strong
position.

I would have the engineer make an appointment for
Monday morning in order to discuss the data. It
is likely that based on this engineer's data and
suggestion, I would strongly recommend to the
board that they vote to implement the suggested
15% decrease in the speed of the line.

102

THE EASTFIELD COMPANY

November 19, 1976

Dear :

 

In attempting to determine the causes of decreasing
efficiency, I have concluded that our punch presses are a
major source of inefficiency. According to my calculations,
they result in a loss to the company of $5,000.00 weekly
in waste and amount of production. It has come to my
attention that there exists a way in which slight and
relatively inexpensive modifications of these machines will
decrease this inefficiency to $2,000.00 weekly. I have
also become aware of the fact that a new punch press has
been developed. I have reviewed the literature pertaining
to the mechanical structure and operation of these machines
and have concluded that they are far more efficient than
our present punch presses. The cost of each machine is
$15,000.00. However, in my opinion, this machine will
result in an 8% gain in production, and thus gains in
profits, which will far outweigh the cost of purchasing
and installing the machines. Therefore, I strongly recom-
mend that we purchase the new machines rather than modi-
fying the old machines. Delaying action will only result
in continued inefficiency and loss of money. It should

also be noted that these machines are in limited supply

103

and, thus, action is needed on this recommendation as soon

as possible.

Sincerely,

Based upon your Opinion of this engineer's knowledge and

experience, as well as the nature of the problem, what

action would you take in deciding whether or not to go

along with this engineer's suggestion?

A.

In questioning whether or not the engineer's data
and conclusion that our present punch presses are
inefficient are actually accurate, I would have
another study conducted to determine whether these
punch presses are a problem.

On the basis of the engineer's conclusion that the
punch presses are inefficient, I would decide to
have the old machines modified rather than purchase
new machines.

In accepting the engineer's conclusion that the
punch presses are inefficient, I would delay my
decision in order that I could hire someone else

to conduct a study and review these new punch
presses before I would take this person's suggestion
or Obtain the other engineer's Opinions upon it.

Based solely upon the data and opinion of this
engineer, I would present the suggestion to purchase
new punch presses to the other engineers to see if
they agree before I would act on this person's
recommendation.

In intending to go along with this person's sug-
gestion, I would ask the engineer to set up an
appointment on Monday to discuss the data and
answer several questions.

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

THE EASTFIELD HOSPITAL
November 19, 1976

As I am sure you are aware, staffing of nurses on
each floor has been based for years upon the number of beds
in each unit. However, many times some of the beds are
empty, and, therefore, the unit is overstaffed. I would
like to recommend that the nurses be assigned to each unit
according to the particular needs Of the patients on each
unit each day rather than according to how many beds there
are on the floor. I realize that this system would require
a great deal of planning, time, and daily rescheduling
of nurses, but I do think it would be a better utilization
of human resources.

Sincerely,

Based upon your opinion of this head nurse's knowledge and
experience, as well as the nature of the problem, what
action would you take in deciding whether or not to go
along with this employee's suggestion?

A. Since other hospitals in the area also assign
nurses to each unit according to the number of beds
and have felt no need to change this system, I
would not take this employee's advice and would
continue to assign nurses according to the number
of beds.

104

105

Although it would take some time and money, I

would hire an outside consultant to conduct a study
and collect data pertaining to this problem before
I would take this person's advice.

In accepting this head nurse's observations that
the staffing Of nurses on each floor is inadequate,
I would present this suggestion to all the nurses
at the regularly scheduled Thursday meeting and
obtain their opinions before I would take this
person's advice.

I would begin on a small basis to take this person's
suggestion by daily reassigning and exchanging
nurses according to the needs of the patients among
a few small units of the hospital to determine
whether or not this daily rescheduling is a better
method of assigning nurses.

With the intention of taking this person's recom-
mendation to reschedule nurses daily, I would have
the head nurse who made the suggestion come in on
Monday morning to discuss his or her Observations
and the implementation of this recommendation.

106

THE EASTFIELD HOSPITAL

November 19, 1976

Dear :

 

I wish to bring to your attention my concern that
needles are not being properly sterilized and could, there-
fore, lead to infection. Based upon my knowledge of the
subject, I do not think the nurses have been trained in the
appropriate procedures for the sterilization process. Due
to this fact, I recommend that the hospital purchase needles
which are presterilized and which are used once and then
thrown away. I am aware of the fact that this innovation
would cost the hospital approximately $8,000.00 a year.
However, I believe that throw-away needles would prevent
imprOper sterilization and would save the nurses a lot of
time since the sterilization process would not be necessary.
In reference to the latter point, the nurses would have more
time to attend to the other needs of the patients. The
longer any decision is delayed on this matter, the greater
the chances of infection.

Sincerely,

Based upon your opinion of this head nurse's knowledge and
experience, as well as the nature of the problem, what
action would you take in deciding whether or not to go along
with this employee's suggestion?

A. In questioning the head nurse's knowledge concerning.
proper needle sterilization, I would conduct a
3 week study in order to see whether or not the
sterilization procedure actually is inadequate.

B. I would conduct a survey of the other area hospitals
to see which ones have switched to disposable
needles and to see whether or not these needles have
improved the functioning of the hospital before
going ahead with this employee's suggestion.

C. I would present this suggestion to all the nurses at
the regularly scheduled Thursday meeting and obtain
their opinions on this idea before I would go ahead
with this employee's suggestion.

D. I would begin on a small basis to take this person's
suggestion by using throw-away needles on one small
unit of the hospital to determine whether or not
their usage is more effective.

107

With the intention Of taking this person's recom-
mendation to purchase throw-away needles, I would
have the head nurse who made the suggestion come'
in on Monday morning to discuss his or her obser-
vations and the immediate hospital-wide implemen-
tation of this recommendation.

108

THE EASTFIELD HOSPITAL

November 19, 1976

Dear :

 

As I am sure you are aware, patients are bathed in
the morning after breakfast. Unfortunately, bathing time
normally overlaps with the time in which medicine is admi-
nistered. In attempting to complete both tasks at the
same time, the nurse is forced to rush. This situation
could very easily lead to errors or an inadequate job.
Furthermore, the completion of both of these tasks requires
the efforts of every nurse on the unit at that particular
time. Therefore, we are inadequately staffed to respond
quickly to an emergency that could occur at this time Of
the day. One possible solution to this problem is to
change the time of one of these activities. Although I
can only speak on the basis of my own knowledge and
experience, I would find such a change in scheduling to
lead to Objections by the patients since any other possible
time would interfere with visitation hours. In my opinion,
the most reasonable solution to this problem is to place
more nurses on the morning shift. Although the hiring of
more nurses will cost the hospital more money, these extra
nurses may help us avoid serious mistakes and may possibly
be the difference between someone's living or dying.

Sincerely,

Based on your opinion of this nurse's knowledge and experi-
ence, as well as the nature of the problem, what action
would you take in deciding whether or not to go along with
this employee's suggestion?

A. I would be inclined to believe that the source of
the problem is not a lack of enough nurses on the
floor but the inability of the head nurse to or-
ganize and coordinate the duties of the nurses on
the floor. Therefore, I would not consider going
along with the nurse's recommendation but would
look into the head nurse's ability to manage the
floor.

B. Before going ahead with this person's suggestion,
I would have an outside consultant look at the
problem and obtain data over a period of two weeks.
Based mostly upon the consultant's data and
Opinion, I would obtain the other nurses' Opinions
and then I would make my decision as to hiring
more nurses.

109

Based upon the Opinion and data of this head nurse,
I would present the suggestion of the head nurse
to hire more nurses at the regularly scheduled
Thursday meeting, and obtain the other nurses'
Opinions before I would take this person's advice.

In intending to go along with this person's advice,
I would have the nurse who made the suggestion come
in on Monday morning to present his or her obser-
vations formally and to answer several questions.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aronson, E., & Golden, B. W. The effect of relevant and
irrelevant aspects of communicator credibility on
Opinion change. Journal of Personality, 1962, 30,
135-146.

 

Aronson, E., Turner, J. A. & Carlsmith, J. M. Communicator
credibility and communication discrepancy as deter-
minants of Opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1963, 61, 31-36.

 

 

Bachman, J. G. Faculty satisfaction and the dean's
influence: An organizational study of twelve
liberal arts colleges. Journal of Applied Psycho-
logy, 1968, 52, 55-61.

 

Bachman, J. G., Smith, C. G., & Slesinger, J. A. Control,
performance, and satisfaction: An analysis of
structural and individual effects. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 4, 127-136.

 

 

Bass, B. M., Krusell, J. & Alexander, R. A. Male managers'
attitudes toward working women. American Behav-
ioral Scientist, 1971, 15, 221-236.

 

 

Bergin, A. E. The effect of dissonant persuasive communi-
cations upon changes in a self-referring attitude.
Journal of Personality, 1962, 30, 423-438.

 

Bowman, G. W., Worthy, N. B. & Greyser, S. A. Are women
executives people? Harvard Business Review, 1965,
43, 14-16+.

 

Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson,
F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. Sex-role stereotype:
A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues,
1972, 28, 59-78.

 

Busch, P. & Wilson, D. T. An experimental analysis of a
salesman's expert and referent bases of social
power in the buyer-seller dyad. Journal of
Marketing Research, 1976, 12, 3-11.

 

 

110

111

Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral
sciences. New York, N.Y.: Academic Press, 1969.

Crisci, R. & Kassinove, H. Effect of perceived expertise,
strength Of advice, and environmental setting on
parental compliance. The Journal of Social Psy-
chology, 1973, 89, 245-250.

 

Dahl, R. A. The concept of power. Behavioral Science,
1957, 2, 201-218.

 

Deaux, K. & Emswiller, T. Explanations of successful
performance on sex-linked tasks: What is skill for
the male is luck for the female. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 80-85.

 

 

Deaux, K. & Taynor, J. Evaluation of male and female
ability: Bias works two ways. Psychological
Reports, 1973, 32, 261-262.

 

 

Evan, W. M. & Zelditch, M. A laboratory experiment on
bureaucratic authority. American Sociological
Review, 1961, 26, 883-893.

 

Feather, N. T. & Simon, J. G. Reactions to male and female
success and failure in sex-linked occupations:
Impressions of personality, causal attributions and
perceived likelihood of different consequences.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975,
31, 20-31.

Fernsberger, S. W. Persistence of stereotypes concerning
sex differences. Journal of Abnormal & Social
Psychology: 1948, 43, 97-101.

 

 

Frankel, E. & Kassinove, H. Effects of required effort,
perceived expertise, and sex on teacher compliance.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 1974, 93, 187-192.

 

French, J. R. P., Jr. A formal theory of social power.
Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 181-194.

 

French, J. R. P., Jr. & Raven, B. The bases of social
power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social
power. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan
Press, 1966.

 

Goldberg, P. Are women prejudiced against women? Trans-
Actiog, 1968, 5, 28-30.

112

Hollander, E. P. Some effects of perceived status on re-
sponses to innovative behavior. In E. P. Hollander,
Leaders, groups, and influence. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1964.

 

Hollander, E. P. & Willis, R. H. Conformity, independence,
and anticonformity as determiners of perceived
influence and attraction. In E. P. Hollander,
Leaders, gpoups, and influence. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1964.

Horai, J., Naccari, N. & Fatoullah, E. The effects of
expertise and physical attractiveness upon opinion
agreement and liking. Sociometry, 1974, 51, 601-
606.

 

Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L. & Kelley, H. H. Communication
andppersuasion. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University
Press, 1953.

 

 

Hovland, C. I. & Weiss, W. The influence of source credi-
bility on communication effectiveness. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 1951, 25, 633-650.

 

Kelman, H. C. Compliance, identification, and internali-
zation: Three processes of attitude change. Jour-
nal of Conflict Resolution, 1958, 2, 51-60.

 

 

Kelman, H. C. & Hovland, C. I. Reinstatement of the commu-
nicator in delayed measurement of Opinion change.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953,
42, 327-335.

 

Kitay, P. M. A comparison of the sexes in their attitudes
and beliefs about women: A study of prestige
groups. Sociometpy, 1940, 2, 399-407.

 

Mischel, H. N. Sex bias in the evaluation of professional
achievements. Journal of Educational Psychology,
1974, 55, 157-166.

 

Moore, H. The comparative influence of majority and expert
Opinion. American Journal of Psychology, 1921,
52, 16-20.

 

Mulder, M. & Wilke, H. Participation and power equaliza-
tion. Organizational Behavior and Human Per-
formance, 1970, 5, 430-448.

 

113

O'Leary, V. E. Some attitudinal barriers to occupational
aspirations in women. Psychological Bulletin,

 

Parsons, T. On the concept of influence. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 1963, 21, 37-62.

 

 

Paterson, D. G. The Scott Company graphic rating scale.
In T. L. Whisler & S. F. Harper (Eds.), Performance
appraisal. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
1962.

 

 

Pheterson, G. I., Kiesler, S. B. & Goldberg, P. A. Evalu-
ation of the performance of women as a function of
their sex, achievement, & personal history. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971,
25, 114-118.

 

Rosen, B. & Jerdee, T. H. The influence of sex-role stereo-
types on evaluations of male and female supervisory
behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973,

52, 44-48.

 

Rosen, B. & Jerdee, T. H. Influence of sex-role stereo-
types on personnel decisions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 1974, 55, 9-14.

 

 

Schein, V. E. The relationship between sex role stereotypes
and requisite management characteristics. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1973, 52, 95-100.

 

Scheinfeld, A. Women and men. New York: Harcourt, Brace,
1944.

 

Schmitt, N. Competence and sex as determinants of the
desirability of treatment by male and female
doctors. Paper presented at the Southeast Psycho-
logical Association Meeting, New Orleans, La.,1973.

 

 

Sherriffs, A. C. & Jarrett, R. F. Sex differences in atti-
tudes about sex differences. Journal of Psycho-

 

Sherriffs, A. C. & McKee, J. P. Qualitative aspects of
beliefs about men and women. Journal Of Persona-

 

Taynor, J. & Deaux, K. When women are more deserving than
men: Equity, attribution, & perceived sex differ-
ences. Journal of Personality and Social Psycho-
logy, 1973, 25, 360-367.

 

114

Terborg, J. R. & Ilgen, D. R. A theoretical approach to
sex discrimination in traditionally masculine occu-

pations. Organizational Behavior and Human Per-
formance, 1975, 25, 352-376.

Thamhain, H. J. & Gemmill, G. R. Influence style of project
managers: Some project performance correlates.
Academy of Management Journal, 1974, 22, 216-224.

Warren, D. I. Power, visibility, and conformity in formal

organizations. American Sociological Review,

Williams, J. J. Patients and prejudice: Lay attitudes
toward women physicians. American Journal of
Sociology, 1946, 52, 283-287.

STATE UNI

nICHIan
)IHIHWIWII H
312

53131

| mmmam“

534422