Executive Summary

This report details the findings of three studies conducted in China investigating the impact of ambivalent sexism—comprising both hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS)—on the career trajectories of women. Through two quasi-experimental studies and one large-scale survey, the research demonstrates that sexist attitudes held by both female job candidates and male interviewers significantly undermine women’s employment prospects. A key finding is that this negative impact is mediated by the underestimation of women’s competence. Furthermore, the research reveals that benevolent sexism, despite its seemingly positive guise, intensifies the detrimental effects of hostile sexism. These findings highlight significant structural barriers that impede progress toward several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 5 (Gender Equality), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). Addressing these forms of bias is critical for creating equitable and inclusive economic opportunities.

Introduction: Ambivalent Sexism as a Barrier to Sustainable Development

Sexism, an artificial factor contributing to inequality, manifests in both hostile and benevolent forms. Hostile sexism (HS) is an overtly antagonistic ideology, while benevolent sexism (BS) is a more subtle, paternalistic belief system that, while appearing positive, confines women to traditional roles. Both forms of sexism work to justify and maintain gender inequality, posing a direct threat to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

• SDG 5: Gender Equality. This research directly addresses the persistence of discriminatory attitudes and practices that prevent women from achieving full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership in economic life (Target 5.5).
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth. By examining biases in the hiring process, this report sheds light on barriers that prevent full and productive employment and decent work for all, particularly for women (Target 8.5). Such biases inhibit inclusive and sustainable economic growth by failing to leverage the full talent pool.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities. The study investigates a key mechanism—gender bias—that perpetuates inequality of opportunity (Target 10.3). Understanding how ambivalent sexism operates is essential for formulating policies to reduce these inequalities.

Research Methodology

The research comprised three distinct studies conducted within China to analyze the multifaceted impact of ambivalent sexism on women’s employment evaluations.

Study 1: Impact of Female Candidates’ Internalized Sexism

• Objective: To assess the direct effects of female candidates’ own HS and BS on their self-evaluated probability of employment.
• Participants: 80 female undergraduate students selected based on high or low scores on HS and BS scales.
• Method: A quasi-experimental design where participants evaluated their own likelihood of being hired for a leadership position after reviewing a job description.

Study 2: Impact of Male Interviewers’ Sexism

• Objective: To investigate the direct effects of male interviewers’ HS and BS on their evaluation of female candidates’ employment probability.
• Participants: 80 male undergraduate students selected based on high or low scores on HS and BS scales.
• Method: A quasi-experimental design where participants, acting as interviewers, evaluated a female candidate’s resume and employment probability.

Study 3: Comprehensive Survey of Professionals

• Objective: To validate the findings from the initial studies with a larger, more diverse sample of professionals and to test the mediating role of competence evaluation.
• Participants: 1,557 currently employed professionals (66% female).
• Method: A large-scale, two-wave online survey assessing participants’ ambivalent sexism, their evaluation of women’s competence for a leadership role, and their assessment of employment probability.

Key Findings and Implications for SDGs

The Detrimental Effect of Ambivalent Sexism on Employment Outcomes

1. Both hostile and benevolent sexism held by female candidates (self-evaluation) and male interviewers (evaluation of others) were found to negatively impact the assessed probability of a woman’s employment success.
2. This finding was consistent across all three studies, indicating a pervasive and systemic issue that directly undermines the principles of SDG 5 and SDG 8 by creating biased barriers to women’s entry and advancement in the workforce.

The Mediating Role of Competence Perception

• Study 3 confirmed that the negative relationship between ambivalent sexism and employment probability is significantly mediated by the underestimation of women’s competence.
• Sexist attitudes lead individuals to perceive women as less competent for leadership roles, which in turn lowers their perceived chances of being hired. This mechanism is a critical barrier to achieving SDG 5 (Target 5.5), which calls for equal opportunities for leadership.

The Intensifying Effect of Benevolent Sexism

• A crucial finding across all three studies is that high levels of benevolent sexism significantly intensify the negative impact of hostile sexism on evaluations of competence and employment probability.
• This “risk-enhancement” effect demonstrates that seemingly protective or positive attitudes are insidious, reinforcing traditional gender roles that limit women’s ambitions and perceived capabilities. This complicates efforts to achieve SDG 5 and SDG 10, as it highlights a subtle but powerful force maintaining gender inequality. By confining women to specific roles, it also hinders the goal of decent work for all under SDG 8.

Conclusion and Recommendations for Advancing SDGs

Summary of Findings

This research provides robust evidence that ambivalent sexism, from both the perspective of the female candidate and the male interviewer, creates significant obstacles to women’s career success. These biases operate by diminishing the perceived competence of female candidates, thereby reducing their evaluated employment probability. Critically, the seemingly benign nature of benevolent sexism masks its harmful role in exacerbating the effects of overt hostility, creating a powerful combination that perpetuates gender inequality in the workplace and hinders progress toward global development goals.

Recommendations

1. Enhance Social Awareness and Policy Intervention: Organizations and policymakers must develop initiatives to raise awareness of both hostile and benevolent sexism. This is a foundational step toward dismantling the discriminatory structures that impede SDG 5 and SDG 10.
2. Implement Unbiased Hiring and Promotion Practices: To support SDG 8, organizations should implement mandatory training for hiring managers and leadership on recognizing and mitigating ambivalent sexism. Evaluation criteria should be standardized and focused on objective measures of competence to ensure merit-based decisions.
3. Empower Female Job Seekers and Professionals: In line with SDG 5, educational programs and workshops should be developed to help women recognize and challenge internalized sexism, build confidence, and develop realistic, positive self-perceptions of their competence and career potential.
4. Promote Further Research: Future research should explore these dynamics in different cultural contexts and examine the long-term career impacts of ambivalent sexism beyond the initial hiring stage. A stronger evidence base is needed to inform global policies aimed at achieving true gender equality.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on ambivalent sexism and its impact on women’s employment outcomes directly addresses and connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary focus on gender-based discrimination in the workplace links it to goals centered on equality, decent work, and reducing inequalities.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This is the most relevant SDG. The article’s entire premise is built on investigating gender inequality, specifically how “ambivalent sexism, which includes both hostile and benevolent sexism, exerts a substantial influence on the trajectory of women’s careers.” It explores the mechanisms of gender bias and discrimination that prevent women from achieving their full potential in the professional sphere.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The research is set within the “occupational field” and examines the “job interview outcomes” for women. By demonstrating that sexism negatively impacts the “evaluation of women’s employment probability,” the article highlights significant barriers to women achieving full and productive employment and decent work. It shows how biased perceptions, rather than competence, can dictate economic opportunities, thus hindering inclusive economic growth.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  This goal aims to reduce inequality within and among countries. The article’s focus on sexism as an “artificial factor contributing to inequality” directly relates to this goal. It analyzes how gender-based biases create and perpetuate inequality of opportunity in the hiring process, particularly for leadership positions, thereby contributing to broader social and economic disparities between men and women.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the specific issues discussed, several SDG targets can be clearly identified.

1. Targets under SDG 5 (Gender Equality)

   • Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.

     The article directly investigates sexism, which it defines as a form of discrimination. It states that “ambivalent sexism can deprive women of opportunities for their development, inhibit their developmental potential, and affect the formation of their career ambitions.” The research empirically demonstrates how this discrimination manifests in the hiring process.

   • Target 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.

     The research explicitly examines the barriers women face in career advancement, stating its aim to “investigate the impact of ambivalent sexism… on the likelihood of women being selected for leadership positions.” The findings that sexism leads to underestimation of competence and lower employment probability for leadership roles directly address the lack of equal opportunities for women in economic decision-making positions.

2. Targets under SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth)

   • Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men… and equal pay for work of equal value.

     The article’s core finding is that sexist attitudes held by both interviewers and candidates negatively affect “women’s job interview outcomes.” This demonstrates a clear barrier to women achieving “full and productive employment.” The study highlights that even when qualifications are similar, women are perceived as less competent, which undermines the principle of equal opportunity for work of equal value.

3. Targets under SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… sex… or other status.

     The research shows how sexism leads to the economic exclusion of women from employment opportunities, particularly in “high-status positions.” The conclusion that “female job seekers should develop more reasonable self-perceptions” and that “more social attention should be paid to gender bias” points to the need for actions that empower women and promote their economic inclusion.

   • Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… practices…

     The article identifies ambivalent sexism as a discriminatory practice that leads to unequal outcomes (“negative impact on the evaluation of women’s employment probability”). By analyzing how these biases function, the research provides evidence for the need to eliminate such practices to ensure equal opportunity in the workplace.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article, being a series of quantitative studies, uses specific variables and measurement tools that can serve as direct or proxy indicators for measuring progress towards the identified targets.

• Evaluation of women’s employment probability: This is a key dependent variable measured across all three studies (e.g., “Do you think you should be hired for the job?”). It serves as a direct indicator for Target 5.5 and 10.3 by quantifying the perceived likelihood of women succeeding in the hiring process, reflecting their access to equal opportunities.
• Evaluation of women’s competence: Measured in Study 3, this is identified as a key mediating factor. The article states that the “negative effect was mediated by the underestimation of women’s competence.” This evaluation can be used as an indicator to measure the persistence of gender stereotypes that undermine women’s qualifications, which is relevant to Target 5.1.
• Scores on the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI): This tool is used in all studies to measure the prevalence of “hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS).” Tracking the scores on this inventory within a population (like a company or country) can serve as an indicator for Target 5.1, measuring the level of discriminatory attitudes and biases against women.
• Likelihood of being selected for leadership positions: The article explicitly investigates this outcome. Tracking the actual proportion of women hired into leadership and managerial roles is a key indicator for Target 5.5. The study’s focus on this area implies its importance as a metric.
• Women’s participation in competitive activities: The article notes that hostile sexism contributes to women’s “lower participation in competitive activities.” Measuring the rate at which women apply for and compete for senior or traditionally male-dominated roles can be an indicator for Target 8.5, reflecting women’s full participation in the economy.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: nature.com