gender-role self-concept
Abstract
The Dutch labor market faces shortages in various traditional ‘female’ occupations, causing threats to various segments of our economy and a desire for men to fill the void. Research on
men in gender-atypical occupations presents contradictory results: both advantageous and obstructive consequences for job satisfaction are reported. As instrumental factors have shown to be unsuccessful in attracting men to gender-atypical occupations, it was thought fruitful to study identity-related variables. Gender-role self-concept was considered a relevant factor in explaining a fit between personal characteristics and work characteristics. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore if gender-role self-concept had a mediating influence on the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. A quantitative study
on 85 men from both occupational groups was conducted using the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire and Bem Sex-Role Inventory. No relation was found between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction or between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role
self-concept. Also, no relation was found between gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction, nor had gender-role self-concept a mediating influence on the relation between
gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. Implications for future research are discussed.
Key words: gender-typicality of occupation, gender-role self-concept, masculine, feminine, job satisfaction
Student, student ID & programme : Vlieg, M.E. (11356944), Social Psychology First & second supervisor: mevr. MSc. A. Jehle & dhr. dr. M. Rotteveel
Introduction
Various occupations in the Netherlands face labor shortages. Primary schools have a hard time finding new staff (Van Vuren, 2017), resulting in an increased workload for employed teachers. Hospitals urgently need equipped nurses as the scarcity leads to longer waiting lists for patients and increased health care costs (“Tekort aan verpleegkundigen,” 2017). The same problems are present in child care centers who are seriously understaffed (Van der Velden, 2017). Along with these labor shortages, the desire for men to return to or enter these
professions is increasingly expressed in society. In primary school education, men are desired role models due to the wielding of different pedagogical styles and for the increasing number of children having a female caretaker due to parental divorce (De Veen, 2016). Despite this desire, only 37% of male teaching graduates is actually equipping a teaching profession in a primary school (“Mannelijke leerkrachten nauwelijks voor de klas,” 2016). Argued reasons for men’s reluctance to stay in these occupations are, among many, low income and a
‘women’s culture’ judged to be incongruent with their male gender-role (De Veen, 2016). As research showed factors as raised income and appealing working hours to be unsuccessful in attracting men to these occupations (Hardie, 2015), it lead me to believe a focus on self-concept and identification with one’s job, rather than primary (i.e. income, working hours) and secondary work features (i.e. thirteenth month, car lease), may explain why some men are attracted to these gender-atypical occupations and others are not. For both societal and
academic reasons, it would be beneficial to examine if gender-role self-concept explains the (lack of) job satisfaction of men in these occupations, hereby adding to the (limited) literature in this field. The current study will therefore thoroughly explore the experienced job
satisfaction of men working in gender-typical and atypical occupations, and determine if and to what extent gender-role self-concept plays a mediating role.
Job satisfaction is a common construct in social psychological and organizational literature and is defined as the intensity of pleasant and positive emotional experience generated when individuals estimate their jobs (Peng & Mao, 2015). Multiple factors are known to influence job satisfaction, such as income, experienced autonomy and relations with management. However, organizational demography - the pattern or distribution of
demographic characteristics such as sex, race, age and tenure composition across an occupation - influences job satisfaction as well (Young & James, 2001). Employees’ experience of job satisfaction has consequences for themselves as well as for organizations they operate in. Cowin, Johnson, Craven & Harsh (2008) showed that higher job satisfaction within a firm correlates positively with performance. In contrast, employees with lower self-reported job satisfaction have higher absenteeism and are more likely to quit (Bender, Donohue & Heywood, 2005).
One element of organizational demography that is known to influence job satisfaction, and is especially relevant in our study, is the male-female ratio of one’s occupation. A man may be employed in a gender-typical occupation, which is an occupational group of whom the majority of employees are made up by men, or a gender-atypical occupation¸ where men are a numerical minority. An explanation can be found in Tajfel’s and Turner’s social identity theory. Our gender – male, female or androgynous – grants us a social identity, and guides appurtenant behavior (Fiske, Gilbert & Lindzey, 2010). Group membership to the category ‘male’ therefore generates a range of expected behaviors, within oneself and in others, including a range of suited occupations that are associated with membership to this category. If one’s occupation is not within the range of typically associated occupations for the category ‘male’, which is the case for men working in gender-atypical occupations, it may possibly create alterations in experienced job satisfaction as these men deviate from appropriated behavior and transgress traditional stereotypes (Van Dello & Bosson, 2013).
Gender becomes perceptually salient when one’s gender is the numerical minority in a group, which is the case for men in gender-atypical occupations. According to Kanter’s seminal theory of tokenism, these men become tokens when they make up 15% or less of the total percentage of employees. When they are such a small minority, they will be seen as symbols of their particular category rather than as individuals. These men will, due to fast, implicit thinking, be seen as a representation of the category ‘men’ rather or before being seen as a member of the category ‘nurse’ or ‘teacher’. Due to this categorization, various
psychological processes will occur that are likely to influence job satisfaction: heightened visibility will create disproportionate performance pressure, female colleagues might create boundaries by exaggerating differences and the men may be subject to limiting stereotypes of their female colleague’s (Korek, Sobiraj, Weseler, Rigotti & Mohr, 2014). Regarding social identity theory and tokenism, it would be interesting to examine if men in gender-atypical occupations indeed experience different levels of job satisfaction than men in gender-typical occupations.
Q1: Do men in gender-atypical occupations differ from men in gender-typical occupations in experienced job satisfaction?
When the degree of job satisfaction and job challenges become clear, the results can – when necessary - be used to improve well-being in the gender-atypical workplace and answer upon the quest for a more gender-balanced workforce and desired male role models. Also, by studying this area the request to more actively represent men in scientific career research is answered upon, as studies on gender-atypical careers has primarily focused on women,
presumably due to later emancipation. Relatively few researchers have studied men who enter female-dominated careers (Dodson & Borders, 2006).
A limited range of studies have examined job satisfaction of men in various
occupations can experience increased as well as decreased job satisfaction, both range of studies will be discussed. Young & James (2001) found a negative relationship between token status and job satisfaction of male flight attendants. As the amount of male co-workers
decreased – thereby increasing their token status-, they reported their job satisfaction to be decreasing. Bender et al. (2005) also found that the job satisfaction of male workers decreased with the proportion of females in their work groups. Adding to that, men in gender-atypical occupations experienced social sanctions from others, such as backlash for transgressing traditional gender stereotypes (Van Dello & Bosson, 2013). We speculate these social
sanctions may have resulted in lowered job satisfaction. In fact, as a member of a group feels devalued, he or she becomes aware of negative expectations others have of them and reports lower self-confidence in performance contexts (Barreto & Ellemers, 2003). Being a member of a group that is evaluated negatively is therefore likely to decrease self-confidence, and as we would expect in the case of work, job satisfaction.
However, there are multiple studies that show mainly positive results for men in gender-atypical occupations. Liminana-Gras, Sánchez-López, Saaverda-San Román & Corbalán-Berná (2013) found that male nurses expressed great job satisfaction, even though they were a minority. Their male role and minority status enabled them to have a stronger sense of self-reported status and power. Dodson & Borders (2006) compared men in traditional (mechanical engineering) and nontraditional (elementary school counseling) occupations and found that school counselors expressed higher job satisfaction than did the engineers. Qualitative research by Simpson (2004) among male cabin crew, nurses and primary school teachers revealed that they gained enjoyment and satisfaction from their jobs. The men indicated that their minority status had mainly positive outcomes: they benefit through assumptions of enhanced leadership, by being given differential treatment and by being associated with a more careerist attitude to work. These studies give the impression that
heightened visibility and contrast with the majority turned out not to be detrimental, but beneficial to the men’s job satisfaction. However, these studies illustrate no clear indication of the exact direction the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction will adopt. Therefore, it would be desirable to examine these factors exploratively, which lead me to the formation of my first hypothesis:
H1:Gender-typicality of occupation will negatively or positively influence job satisfaction
Next to exploring differences in job satisfaction, it is useful to examine factors men may believe to cause satisfaction with an occupation. Akerlof and Kranton state that people choose a certain field of education or occupation because it pays off in terms of future income and identity, due to a rewarding self-image (Humlum, Kleinjans & Nielsen, 2012). People will likely pick a job that requires specific qualities that matches aspects of their self-concept. One element of our self-concept is our gender role-self-concept (GRSC) : the degree to which a person sees himself/herself as having feminine and masculine attributes or qualities. A masculine self-concept is associated with agentic qualities: independence, aggressiveness, autonomy, instrumentality and courage, whereas a feminine self-concept is associated with communal qualities: expressiveness, connectedness, relatedness, kindness, supportiveness and timidness (Korek et al., 2014; Schmader & Block, 2015). Not seldom, these attributes are found in job descriptions. Men and women may therefore choose a typical or atypical occupation because the required qualities align with their gender-role self-concept.
Though scarce, some research on gender-role self-concept and occupation has been conducted. A study by Jome & Takar (as cited in Dodson & Border, 2006) among men in gender-typical occupations indicates they likely maintained a masculine self-concept: they endorsed traditional masculinity ideology (i.e. antifemininity and toughness) to a greater extent than did men in gender-atypical careers. When reviewing literature on the gender-role
self-concept of men in gender-atypical occupations, contradictory results are found. Lemkau’s study (as cited in Dordson & Borders, 2006)) showed that men working in gender-atypical careers reported lower masculinity and higher androgyny scores compared to gender-typical career men. As this was a correlation and not a causation, the direction of this relation is still unsure. The nature of the work might have caused these men to develop more communal qualities and weaken their masculine self-concept, but they also might have had a more feminine self-concept to begin with, which was strengthened by the nature of the work that resulted in developing communal qualities.
On the other hand, there is literature indicating men in gender-atypical occupations may possess a masculine self-concept. Korek et al. (2014) found that men’s minority position was negatively related to their masculinity: the smaller their proportion within their teams, the higher they rated their masculinity. This suggests they may have endorsed a masculine self-concept. Simpson’s (2004) findings show men in gender-atypical professions did considerable ‘gender work’ to restore a masculine image that has been undermined by the female nature of the job. As the public image of the job was incongruent with their self-image they adopted strategies to overcome discomfort, such as relabeling the job title, re-casting job content to enhance more masculine components and distancing from the female. This suggests men crafted their jobs in such a way that it matched their masculine self-concepts. A gender-atypical occupation may be threatening to perceived manhood, which is a precarious social status that is both difficult to achieve and tenuously held (Vandello, Bosson, Cohen, Burnaford & Weaver, 2008).
It would be interesting to examine the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept, as a concern to lose or desire to maintain masculinity may be a reason to be reluctant or enthusiastic towards a profession in a gender-atypical occupation. As these contradictory results show, I have no clear indication of the exact direction the relation
between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept will adopt. This lead me to the decision to exploratively test these factors and to the formation of my second research question and hypothesis:
Q2: Is there a correlation between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept?
H2: There will be a positive or negative correlation between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept.
Having studied the aforementioned literature, it gives me the impression that a congruency in the gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept may possibly result in job satisfaction. If there is a match between the required occupational qualities and corresponding agentic and/or communal qualities, it is possible one will experience job satisfaction, as one can use personal qualities in their professional life (Ros, Schwartz & Surkiss, 1999). A man may, for example, be able to use agentic qualities in a gender-atypical occupation and maintain his masculine self-concept, or find a match with his more feminine or androgynous self-concept, which, in both cases, will likely result in job satisfaction. Therefore, I am under the impression that gender-typicality of occupation may influence job satisfaction through one’s gender-role self-concept.
Q3: Does gender-role self-concept mediate the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction?
H3: The relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction is mediated by gender-role self-concept
Unfortunately, it is hard to give strong arguments for this offered line of reasoning, as a proposed relation between two of these factors – gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction – has, to my best knowledge, not been subject of academic research. A search for literature on
these topics has left me with zero results. However, as Akerlof & Kranton (2005) and Rustemeyer (2001) showed occupational choices are made based on image or self-concept, I have reason to believe that examining an aspect of self-concept – namely, gender-role self-concept- may be fruitful in relation to job satisfaction. In the light of other factors – income, working hours - being unsuccessful in attracting and retaining men in gender-atypical occupations (Korek et al., 2014), it would therefore be interesting to explore if, and how, gender-role concept and job satisfaction are related. This has led me to the explorative examination of the variables gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction and the formation of my conceptual model, as shown in figure 1,
Q4: Is there a correlation between gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction? H4: There will be a positive or negative correlation between gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction
The current study will therefore examine if gender-role self-concept is of significant
importance for experiencing job satisfaction among men in child care, social work, nursing, primary education, IT-services and engineering. By executing a quantitative study and the conduction of surveys, we hope to determine relations between factors that have not been subject to extensive research and hopefully contribute to knowledge on the attractiveness of gender-atypical career paths. Work is an important aspect of people’s lives as it enables us to accomplish personal and life values in our daily job (Ros et al., 1999) and an understanding of the factors involved in job satisfaction, especially gender-role self-concept, is important in improving the well-being of a significant number of people.
Figure 1. Conceptual model
Methods
Participants
Participants were recruited by contacting various labor associations, by using professional networking site LinkedIn and through the researcher’s personal networks. Participants were selected on the following criteria: 1) being male 2) working in a gender-typical or a gender-agender-typical occupation. In total, 85 men participated in the study. No payment or other form of reward was issued for partaking in the survey, but a €25,- check was allotted to one of the participants who completed the survey.
Procedure
Participation in the study was done electronically using Qualtrics. First, participants were presented a short letter explaining the subject and purpose of the study, followed by an informed consent. The survey then continued with demographic information that had to be filled out: participant’s gender, age, level of education, occupational field and years of experience in one’s occupational field were asked for. Then, the questions on job satisfaction were introduced counterbalanced, followed by a question on actual working hours, monthly salary, status and an open question on factors participants believed to influence job
self-concept were introduced to participants. Finally, participants had the option to write down questions or comments on the study and indicate whether they wanted to win a check for their participation. The time to complete the online survey was approximately 10 minutes.
Measures
Gender-typicality of occupation. The gender-typicality of occupations was determined by the 85-15% male-female ratio of occupations reported by data of the Dutch Bureau of Statistiscs (Centraal Bureau voor Statistiek, 2017; Vossers & Dam, 2015). Regarding this data, engineers and IT-staff, specifically software consultants, were considered to be occupational groups that belonged to the gender-typical condition. Child care employees, nurses and pharmacist’s assistants were used as representative occupational field for the gender-atypical condition. Primary school teachers and social workers were also included in this category, although they had a male-female ratio leaning towards 80-20%. However, as the desire to obtain male role models in these professions was raised from both members of these occupational groups and society, it was decided to obtain findings of both groups due to social relevance.
Job satisfaction. The short form of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) developed by Weiss and Cropanzano is a 20-item self-report measure of job satisfaction and includes two subscales: intrinsic- and extrinsic satisfaction. Items are rated on a Likert-scale, ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 7 (very satisfied). An example of an item on the intrinsic scale is: ‘‘the ability to use my talents and skills’’ and an example of an item on the extrinsic scale is: “the way company policies are put into practice”. Scores are computed for total job satisfaction, intrinsic job satisfaction and extrinsic job satisfaction. The range of the scores for total job satisfaction lies between a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 140, with an average score of 108. A score of 20 represented very low job satisfaction and a score of 140
represented very high job satisfaction. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients on the scales were respectively α = 0.88 on the intrinsic scale, α = 0.79 on the extrinsic scale and α = 0.92 on the total scale. Respectively, these are considered good, acceptable and excellent.
Gender-role self-concept. The short version of the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) measures people’s self-description of gender-typical traits. The BSRI consists of 12 items, of which 6 items (warm, gentle, affectionate, sympathetic, sensitive to other’s needs, tender) belong to a femininity-subscale and 6 items (has leadership abilities, strong personality, acts as a leader, dominant, defends own beliefs, makes own decisions easily) belong to a
masculinity-subscale. Respondents indicate the extent to which they find these traits self-descriptive on a 7 point scale, ranging from ‘1 = never’ to ‘7 = always’. Scores are computed for both the masculinity-subscale and the femininity-subscale, which ranged from 6 as the lowest possible score to 42 as the highest possible score. A score of 6 represents a very weak gender-role concept, whereas a score of 42 represent a very strong gender-role self-concept. For the masculinity-subscale, the average score was 28, compared to an average score of 27 on the femininity-subscale. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were found for to be good for the masculinity scale (α = 0.88) and acceptable for the femininity scale (α = 0.75).
Demographic variables
Working hours. In various occupational fields, the actual working hours may vary from working hours agreed on in labor contracts. On a scale from 0 hours to 60 hours, we asked participants to numerically indicate the amount of hours they worked in reality in an average week.
Salary. As salary is a known predictor of job satisfaction (Judge, Piccolo, Podsakoff, Shaw & Rich, 2010), it was decided to include a question on participant’s salary. We stated the average monthly net salary of the working Dutch population – specifically, € 2.152 - and asked participants how much their monthly income varied from this amount, ranging from ‘1
= A lot lower than this monthly salary’ to ‘7 = A lot higher than this monthly salary’. Status. We explained status to our participants to include aspects such as having a nice car, fulfilling a high rank or position at work, a good salary or the fact that people look up to you or admire you. On a scale from ‘0 = absolutely not important’ to ‘100 = very important’ we asked participants to numerically indicate how much they valued status.
Employment in occupational field. We speculated that longer employment possibly has resulted in higher salary and increased abilities to craft a job to desired means, which in turn, is likely to result in higher job satisfaction. Therefore, we asked participants to indicate how long they were active within their profession. The following options were given: 0-2 years, 2-5 years, 2-5-10 years, 10-years or longer.
Results
Descriptives
A total of 115 participants filled out the survey. 23 participants were excluded from the analyses due to missing cases and 7 participants were excluded because they were female. Therefore, 85 participants remained (Mage = 39 years, age range 21 – 67). The gender-typical group consisted of (N=33) participants and the gender-atypical group had (N=52) participants. Of the gender-typical group, 13 participants worked as an engineer and 18 had a profession in IT. For the gender-atypical group, the division of occupational fields was 15 men in childcare, 13 men in social work, 11 men working as a nurse, 2 men working as a pharmacist’s assistant and 7 primary school teachers. 6 men indicated they worked in different professions, namely financial services, youth care and automation. Men in financial services (2) and automation (1) were ascribed to the gender-typical group and men in youth care (3) were ascribed to the atypical group. The decision to code automation and financial services as gender-typical groups was made given the fact that the majority of employees in this occupational
group is male. Youth care workers - an occupational group of which the majority of the employees is female –was considered to be a gender-atypical occupation.
Considering level of education, the distribution of schooling was as follows: 1 VMBO , 19 MBO, MTS or MEAO, 1 Havo, Vwo or Gymnasium, 55 HBO, HEAO, PABO or HTS and 9 University. 14 men were working in their occupational fields from 0-2 years, 23 men for 2-5 years, 15 men for 5-10 years and 33 men for 10 years or longer.
Normality was checked for the job satisfaction variables and gender-role self-concept, using Kolmogorov-Smirnov’s tests and histograms. Masculine self-concept, D(85) = 0.07, p = .20 and feminine self-concept D(85) = 0.08, p = .20 were found to follow a normal
distribution. Total job satisfaction D(85) = 0.18, p < .001, intrinsic job satisfaction D(85) = 0.20, p < .001 and extrinsic job satisfaction D(85) = 0.15, p < .001, were all significantly non-normal. Therefore, the decision to perform non-parametric tests on these variables was made. Means, standard deviations and correlations were calculated for the main variables and are, respectively, displayed in table 1 and 2.
Table 1. Means and standard variations of the main variables.
Gender-typical M SD Gender-atypical M SD GRSC feminine GRSC masculine Job satisfaction intrinsic Job satisfaction extrinsic Total job satisfaction
27.09 26.55 67.97 32.67 111.52 4.70 6.76 9.85 5.78 16.92 28.88 27.04 64.85 31.13 106.15 4.40 5.84 10.01 5.59 16.25
Table 2. Correlations between main variables
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Hypotheses
1. Gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction
It was expected that gender-typicality of occupation would, positively or negatively, differ from job satisfaction. This assumption was exploratively tested using a Mann-Whitney’s test. Men in gender-typical conditions (Mdn = 115.00) did not differ significantly from men in gender-atypical conditions (Mdn = 111.00) in total job satisfaction, U = 662.5, z = -1.76, p = .08, r = -0.19. Occupational types – be it gender-typical or gender-atypical - did not
significantly differ in job satisfaction. Therefore, our hypothesis could not be accepted. Type of occupation Feminine self-concept Masculine self-concept Intrinsic job satisfaction Extrinsic job satisfaction Total job satisfaction Type of occupation Feminine self-concept Masculine self-concept Intrinsic job satisfaction Extrinsic job satisfaction Total job satisfaction
1.00 .19 .07 -.17 -.15 -.19 .19 1.00 .05 .03 -.03 -.02 .07 .05 1.00 .18 .25* .16 -.17 .03 .18 1.00 .75** .94** -.15 -.03 .25* .75** 1.00 .89** -.19 -.02 .16 .94** .89** 1.00
2. Gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept
As little research was done on gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept, Spearman’s rho was computed to test for significant correlations. It was expected that typicality of occupation and role self-concept would be related. However, gender-typicality of occupation was not significantly correlated with a feminine self-concept, r = .19, p = .08. Neither was there a significant relationship found between gender-typicality of
occupation and a masculine self-concept, r = .07, p = .52. Although no significant correlations were found, it would be logical to analyze if variations in self-concept were found for men in different occupational conditions. A Mann-Whitney test showed men in the gender-typical occupation (Mdn = 27.00) did not differ significantly from men in the gender-atypical occupation (Mdn = 28.50) in feminine self-concept, U = 1.05, z = 1.76, p >.05. Men in the typical occupation (Mdn = 27.00) did neither significantly differ from men in gender-atypical occupation (Mdn = 28.50) in masculine self-concept, U = .99, z = .64, p > .05. Therefore, both null-hypotheses were retained.
3. Gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction
It was expected to find a relation between gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction. First, feminine self-concept and job satisfaction were analyzed. No significant relationship was found between a feminine self-concept and total job satisfaction, r = -.02, p = .89. Second, masculine self-concept and job satisfaction were analyzed. There was no significant
relationship found between a masculine self-concept and total job satisfaction, r = .16, p = .14. Therefore, our hypothesis could not be accepted.
4. The role of gender-role self-concept on the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction.
The expectation was drawn that gender-role self-concept would mediate the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. However, there was no significant indirect effect of gender-typicality of occupation on job satisfaction through feminine self-concept, b = .380, BCa CI [-0.928, 3.037]. No significant indirect effect of gender-typicality on job satisfaction through masculine self-concept was found, either, b = .294, BCa CI [-1.107, 3.676]. The null-hypothesis was therefore retained.
Ancillary analyses
Complementary analysis were performed to examine the relation between variables gender-typicality of occupation, gender-role self-concept, and subscales of job satisfaction, namely intrinsic – and extrinsic job satisfaction.
First, the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and the subscales of job satisfaction was examined. Looking at intrinsic satisfaction, men in gender-typical conditions (Mdn = 70.00) did not differ significantly from in gender-atypical conditions (Mdn = 68.00) in experienced intrinsic satisfaction, U = 686.5, z = -1.55, p = .12, r = -0.19. For extrinsic satisfaction, the same conclusion could be drawn: men in gender-typical conditions (Mdn = 34.00) did not differ significantly from men in gender-atypical conditions (Mdn = 33.00) in experienced extrinsic satisfaction, U = 706.5, z = -1.37, p = .17, r = -0.15.
Second, the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and the subscales of job satisfaction was examined. No significant relationship was found between a feminine self-concept and intrinsic satisfaction, r = .03, p = .81 or extrinsic satisfaction, r = -.03, p = .79. Also, there was no significant relationship found between a masculine self-concept and intrinsic job satisfaction, r = .18, p = .10. However, there was a significant relationship found
between masculine self-concept and extrinsic job satisfaction, r = .25, p < .05. The stronger a masculine self-concept was endorsed, the more satisfied men were with extrinsic job factors. Although no theoretical foundation was made to support statistical tests on elements of total job satisfaction – respectively, subscales intrinsic- and extrinsic job satisfaction-, it was thought to be relevant to examine possible correlations in hindsight, since data was already collected and might provide interesting findings.
As working in a specific occupation may undermine or secure one’s status as a man, it was thought to be relevant to examine whether men in gender-typical occupations varied from men in gender-atypical occupations in the importance they ascribed to status. A significant correlation was found for gender-typicality of occupation and status, r = .23, p <.05. To test if men in various occupational conditions varied on the importance they ascribed to status, a Mann-Whitney was computed. Men in the gender-atypical condition (Mean = 47.51) differed significantly from men in gender-typical conditions (Mean = 35.89) on the importance they ascribed to achieving and maintaining a high status, U = 1.09, z = 2.12, p <.05, r = 0.23. Men in a atypical occupation valued status to a higher extent than did men in a gender-typical occupation.
Discussion
In our study, we analyzed the relation between gender-typicality of occupation, gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction. We found no correlation between type of occupation and job satisfaction. Hence, men in gender-typical professions such as engineering did not experience significantly higher or lower job satisfaction than men working in gender-atypical occupations as nursing or teaching. Also, no significant correlation was found between the
typicality of occupation and role self-concept. Working in a typical or gender-atypical occupation was, therefore, not related to endorsing a masculine or feminine
self-concept. Gender-role self-concept was also not associated with job satisfaction. Finally, role self-concept did not have a mediating role in the relationship between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction of men working in typical or a-typical occupations was not explained by a masculine or feminine self-concept.
Overall, we believe an important reason we did not find our null-hypotheses rejected – and a limitation of this study – can be ascribed to our small sample size, resulting in lower power. Some analyses were close to significance, but the limited number of participants – especially in the gender-typical condition - may have prevented finding significant results. A suggestion for future research would therefore be to reward participants with a small payment or other attractive benefits, or provide organizations with the possibility to process some questions on job satisfaction or other variables of interest in a separated section of the
enquiry. Also, a large number of participants should be recruited to correct for drop-outs and, in our case, female participants. However, in what follows, theoretical implications of our research will be discussed.
A possible explanation for the fact that we did not find significant differences in job satisfaction of men in typical and atypical occupations, may be that men in gender-atypical occupations do not necessarily experience the negative consequences associated with
tokenism, such as performance pressure and boundaries with the majority (Korek et al., 2014), or social sanctions (Van Dello & Bosson, 2013). This may provide counter-evidence for Kanter’s theory of tokenism. To confirm this, it would be interesting to explicitly test if men in a-typical occupations experience these phenomena in future research. Possibly, they may also not have experienced colleague’s or supervisor’s assumptions of enhanced leadership and a more careerist attitude to work, as was the case in Limininana-Gras et al. (2013) study, which might have resulted in a job satisfaction that did not differ significantly from the gender-typical group. However, as Young & James (2001) stated, there are multiple factors
known to influence job satisfaction amongst organizational demography, such as experienced autonomy and relations with management. It could also be an option that other non-studied variables, such as experienced autonomy and relations with management, interplayed with typicality of occupation in determining job satisfaction. As the sole factor gender-typicality of occupation does not seem enough to explain differences in job satisfaction, we recommend to involve multiple variables known to influence job satisfaction– such as
experienced autonomy and relations with management – and an in-depth study of mechanisms of tokenism for future research.
Adding to that, in our study, data for job satisfaction followed a positively skewed distribution. It may be that, by coincidence, our sample included a relatively high percentage of men that experience high job satisfaction. Due to a narrow range of variance, it may have been hard to find significant differences or correlations. The high level of job satisfaction may also be explained by the fact that most men of our sample were older and had quite some years of work experience. Possibly, this had a positive influence on their salary, experienced autonomy and ability to craft their job to their desired means, which is likely to result in higher job satisfaction (Tims, Bakker & Derks, 2013).
No relation was found between gender-typicality of occupation and gender-role self-concept. However, the theory gives us an indication that men in gender-typical occupations likely endorse a stronger masculine self-concept and that self-concept for men in gender-atypical occupations is still guessed upon: nontraditional career men reported lower masculinity and higher androgyny scores (Dodson & Borders, 2006). However, Simpson’s (2004) findings show men in gender-atypical professions did considerable ‘gender work’ to restore a masculine image that has been undermined by the female nature of the job. An explanation for our finding may be rooted in the active debate in society concerning gender: as transgressing gender stereotypes is slowly becoming more acceptable – though more often
for women than for men- (Deutsch, 2007) it could be possible that men reported honestly on both scales, resulting in nearly identical scores on the masculinity and femininity scale. Apart from that, although the BSRI is considered as a valid and credible measure to examine
gender-roles (Holt & Ellis, 1998), in future research it might be useful to combine it with a questionnaire that deeply touches on gender-related schema’s. The BSRI statements may have been considered by participants as personality traits, rather than as masculine-instrumental or feminine-communal aspects they believe to form their self-concept.
Looking at gender-role self-concept and job satisfaction, no significant relation was found. Due to the fact that this hypothesis had a highly explorative aim and literature on these variables was non-existent, we were not surprised by these results. However, we believe a reason that we did not find our hypothesis accepted, may be ascribed to the fact that gender-role self-concept is not a relevant construct to explain or account for job satisfaction.
Identifying oneself as masculine or feminine may, as our research examined, not be related to increased or decreased job satisfaction. Another probability is these constructs only get meaning in the practical sense: we speculate that when one is able to exploit aspects of their masculine or feminine self-concept in their occupation, this may lead to job satisfaction. In future research, next to exploring one’s gender-role self-concept, it would therefore be useful to measure the extent to which participants feel they can put their masculinity or femininity to use in their jobs.
No mediating effect was found of gender-role self-concept on the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. An explanation for this finding can be found in the fact that correlations between the underlying variables were non-significant. Therefore, one is unlikely to find a mediation. And, as stated before, it is likely that multiple factors interplay to explain the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction, such as gradations of experienced autonomy, relations with management and
tokenism combined with gender-role self-concept. We therefore suggest to study the role of gender-role self-concept on the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction while controlling for these factors.
Although our main hypotheses were not confirmed, there are some alternative findings that are worth discussing. First, a significant relation was found between masculine self-concept and extrinsic job satisfaction. As the strength of the masculine self-self-concept increased, so did the experienced extrinsic job satisfaction. Although most evidence indicates no gender differences in explaining job satisfaction, there is some literature indicating men value extrinsic factors, such as external validation and freedom to fill in their job as they desire to a slightly higher degree than women (Miller, 1980). When analyzing the items that make up extrinsic job satisfaction, we noted these items also imply a sense of job control. Job control is regarded as a job resource and refers to the freedom in deciding how to carry out given job tasks (Le Blanc, de Jonge & Schaufeli, 2008). In the open-ended questions, elements of job control were also indicated to be important factors for job satisfaction. The fact that the items on the extrinsic scale present a sense of job control, and that men specifically reported
elements of job control to be important to their job satisfaction, gives us an indication that job control as a work characteristic may be important to men who endorse a masculine self-concept. In light of our theory, we speculate that men probably hesitate to enter gender-atypical occupations, as they may believe extrinsic satisfaction and job control will be low in these professions. Occupational groups as primary school teachers and nurses have, indeed, reported to be bothered by company policies – i.e. administrative duties that lead to reduced time for patients and children, exhaustive protocols and limited options for their own professionality (Meindertsma, 2017) -, decreased pay (Van Ammelrooy, 2017) and
undervaluation of their profession (“Docent wil vooral waardering,” 2017). This corresponds with items of our extrinsic satisfaction scale, such as ‘the way company policies are put into
practice’, ‘acknowledgment for the work I do’ and ‘the freedom to form my own opinion’. Therefore, a suggestion for future research would be to include job control as a factor when studying job satisfaction in gender-typical and atypical occupations.
Another interesting finding was the association between type of occupation and status. Men in a-typical occupations ascribed more importance to status than men in gender-typical occupations did. This finding may be indicating that, although working in a gender-atypical occupation, it is important for them to maintain or achieve status, and possibly retain their masculinity (Simpson, 2004). They may, on the one hand, indeed experience status threat because of their a-typical occupation, which would provide proof for Kanter’s theory of tokenism. On the other hand, they may achieve status through working in a gender-atypical occupation, possibly bringing our findings in line with Simpson’s (2004) findings: that a minority status had mainly positive outcomes – i.e. assumptions of enhanced leadership and the association with a careerist attitudes to work – and one’s minority position helped to achieve status. For future research, it would therefore be interesting to thoroughly examine if men feel their status is enhanced or limited through their occupation.
This study contributes to literature on men in gender-atypical careers by exploring the role of a new factor, gender-role self-concept, in job satisfaction of men in gender-typical and atypical occupations. No mediating role was found of gender-role self-concept on the relation between gender-typicality of occupation and job satisfaction. As no differences were found in job satisfaction for gender-typicality of occupation, we are possibly providing
counter-evidence for Kanter’s theory of tokenism. However, results have to be interpreted carefully, due to limited sample size and possible selection effects. Presumably, only men who are satisfied and passionate about their atypical careers participated in our study. We strongly encourage follow-up studies on gender-role self-concept or other self-concept and identity-related variables in explaining the attractiveness of gender-atypical careers and job
satisfaction for men. By doing so, we will hopefully offer valuable insights in the
underrepresentation of men in gender-atypical careers and offer practical implications for attracting men to these occupations, hereby fulfilling society’s desire for male role models and create a flourishing economy
Literature
Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2003). The effects of being categorised: The interplay between internal and external social identities. European review of social psychology, 14(1), 139-170. doi: 10.1080/10463280340000045
Bender, K. A., Donohue, S. M., & Heywood, J. S. (2005). Job satisfaction and gender segregation. Oxford economic papers, 57(3), 479-496.doi:10.1093/oep/gpi015
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2017). Werkzame beroepsbevolking; beroep. Retrieved from http://statline.cbs.nl/
Cowin, L. S., Johnson, M., Craven, R. G., & Marsh, H. W. (2008). Causal modeling of self- concept, job satisfaction, and retention of nurses. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(10), 1449-1459. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.10.009
De Veen, T. (2016, October 5). De klas mag wel wat stoerder. NRC. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2016/10/05/de-klas-mag-wel-wat-stoerder-4653058- a1525081
Docent wil vooral waardering, geen nieuwe leaseauto (2017, September 14). RTL Nieuws. Retrieved from https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/geld-en-werk/leaseautos-voor-nieuwe- leraren-maar-docent-wil-vooral-waardering
Dodson, T. A., & Borders, L. A. (2006). Men in traditional and nontraditional careers: Gender role attitudes, gender role conflict, and job satisfaction. The Career Development Quarterly, 54(4), 283-296. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2006.tb00194.x
Fiske, S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (2010). Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2). John Wiley & Sons: New York.
Hardie, J. H. (2015). Women’s work? Predictors of young men’s aspirations for entering traditionally female-dominated occupations. Sex Roles, 72(7-8), 349-362. doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0449-1
Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Sex roles, 39(11-12), 929-941.
Humlum, M. K., Kleinjans, K. J., & Nielsen, H. S. (2012). An economic analysis of identity and career choice. Economic inquiry, 50(1), 39-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1465-
7295.2009.00234.x
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., Podsakoff, N. P., Shaw, J. C., & Rich, B. L. (2010). The relationship between pay and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(2), 157-167. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2010.04.002
Korek, S., Sobiraj, S., Weseler, D., Rigotti, T., & Mohr, G. (2014). The gender role self- concept of men in female- dominated occupations: does it depend on how they see their jobs? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(4), 241-254. doi:10.1111/jasp.12235
Liminana-Gras, R. M., Sánchez-López, M. P., Saavedra-San Román, A. I., & Corbalán Berná, F. J. (2013). Health and gender in female-dominated occupations: The case of male nurses. The Journal of Men's Studies, 21(2), 135-148. doi: 10.3149/jms.2102.135
Mannelijke leerkrachten staan nauwelijks nog voor de klas (2016, October 5), RTL Nieuws. Retrieved from https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nederland/mannelijke-leerkrachten-staan- nauwelijks-nog-voor-de-klas
Meindertsma, B. (2017, April 10). Basisschoolleraren: werkdruk vooral door administratieve rompslomp. NOS. Retrieved from https://nos.nl/artikel/2167480-basisschoolleraren- werkdruk-vooral-door-administratieve-rompslomp.html
Miller, J. (1980). Individual and occupational determinants of job satisfaction: A focus on gender differences. Sociology of work and Occupations, 7(3), 337-366.
Peng, Y., & Mao, C. (2015). The impact of person–job fit on job satisfaction: the mediator role of self-efficacy. Social Indicators Research, 121(3), 805-813. doi: 10.1007/s11205- 014-0659-x
Ros, M., Schwartz, S. H., & Surkiss, S. (1999). Basic individual values, work values, and the meaning of work. Applied psychology, 48(1), 49-71.
Rustemeyer, R. (2001). Interrelations among gender-role conflict, typicality of occupations, and self-esteem. Psychological reports, 89(3), 489-494. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2001.89.3.489
Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). Engendering identity: Toward a clearer conceptualization of gender as a social identity. Sex Roles, 73(11-12), 474-480.
doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0536-3
Simpson, R. (2004). Masculinity at work: the experiences of men in female dominated occupations. Work, employment and society, 18(2), 349-368.
doi: 10.1177/09500172004042773
Tekort aan verpleegkundigen is urgent probleem (2017, July 12), RTL Nieuws.
Retrieved from https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/gezondheid/tekort-aan-verpleegkundigen-is- urgent-probleem
Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2013). The impact of job crafting on job demands, job resources, and well-being. Journal of occupational health psychology, 18(2), 230. doi: 10.1037/a0032141
Van Ammelrooy, P. (2017, February 11). Zorgverlenen over de grens: riant salaris, lagere werkdruk en prima arbeidsvoorwaarden. de Volkskrant. Retrieved from:
https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/zorgverlenen-over-de-grens-riant-salaris-lagere- werkdruk-en-prima-arbeidsvoorwaarden~a4460976/
Vandello, J. A., Bosson, J. K., Cohen, D., Burnaford, R. M., & Weaver, J. R. (2008). Precarious manhood. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(6), 1325. doi: 10.1037/a0012453
Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2013). Hard won and easily lost: A review and synthesis of theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men &
Masculinity, 14(2), 101. doi: 10.1037/a0029826
Van der Velden, L. (2017, February 7). Plots weer schreeuwend tekort aan personeel kinderopvang: hoe kan dat? de Volkskrant. Retrieved from
https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/plots-schreeuwend-tekort-aan-personeel- kinderopvang-hoe-kan-dat~a4459034/
Van Vuren, R. (2017, August 21). Hoe lossen we het lerarentekort op? Een Vandaag. Retrieved from https://eenvandaag.avrotros.nl/binnenland/item/hoe-lossen-we-het- lerarentekort-op/
Vossers, A. & Dam, Y. (2015, March 11). Heb jij een mannen- of een vrouwenbaan? NRC. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2015/03/11/heb-jij-een-mannen-of-een- vrouwenbaan-a1497357
Wolfram, H. J., Mohr, G., & Borchert, J. (2009). Gender role self-concept, gender-role conflict, and well-being in male primary school teachers. Sex roles, 60(1-2), 114-127. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9493-4
Young, J. L., & James, E. H. (2001). Token majority: The work attitudes of male flight attendants. Sex Roles, 45(5-6), 299-319. doi: 0360-0025/01/0900-0299/0
Appendix 1.
Complementary analyses were performed to check if the variables were in line with our expectations – e.g. if years of experience, level of education and number of working hours would result in a higher pay, which one would logically expect.
Table 3. Correlations between control variables
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Age Level of education Years of experience Working hours Salary Status Age Level of education Years of experience Working hours Salary Status 1.00 -.03 .68** -.00 .43** -.15 -.03 1.00 -.10 .16 .25* .03 .68** -1.03 1.00 .11 .32** -.14 .00 .16 .11 1.00 .42** .07 .43** .25* .32** .42** 1.00 .10 -.15 .03 -.14 .07 .10 1.00
