| Abstract: | Midwestern personnel and management association members rated bogus job applications which had identical background qualifications but varied by sex of applicant, sex-role related attributes of applicant, and degree of fit of applicant credentials to job demands. The applicants were rated on their qualifications and likelihood of being considered for the position, expected performance, and expected success in the job. A significant triple interaction was found for the variable that measured the likelihood of the applicant being considered for the position (i.e., access to the position). Higher access ratings were given to the sex–stereotypical applicant when the applicant's credentials matched job demands. When the applicant's credentials did not fit the job demands, raters tended to favor non–stereotypical applicants. Practical and research implications are discussed. |
