We often hear from women that they “have to work twice as hard to get half as far.” What’s behind this? Studies show that, in jobs historically held by men, men are presumed to be competent, while women often have to prove their competence over and over again. Common double standards are described below.

Attribution Bias

In ambiguous situations, gender stereotypes drive what inferences are drawn. Because of the perceived lack of fit between women and historically male jobs, men but not women benefit from an assumption of competence:

Men are judged on their potential; women on their achievements[1]
I’ve seen promotion decisions where a man will be [promoted to] full professor without current funding, just with something submitted and pending, versus a woman who was not to be considered until she could demonstrate that she could renew her existing grant that still had time left in it.[2]

What is skill in a man is luck (or sex appeal) in a woman[3]
I worked very hard because this is my first time to become a teacher so I’m very dedicated, so I would spend every Saturday and Sunday working in my office preparing lecture notes,...and I spent a lot of time with my students, and I got a very good evaluation from my students, and then I heard my colleagues say, “Oh, because she is young and attractive, so that is why students like her.”

He’s brilliant; she’s reliable
One study showed that letters of recommendation written for men tended to describe them as “brilliant and original,” whereas letters of recommendation written for women tend to describe them as reliable, responsible, and meticulous.[4]

Recall Bias

People tend to remember stereotype-consistent information better than stereotype-inconsistent information. [5]

Why can't they just let it go?
Women's mistakes may be remembered long after those of their male colleagues are forgotten.

Prove it...and prove it again
Women but not men may have to prove their worth over and over again.[6]

My achievements have been underplayed and my faults exaggerated greatly in comparison to my colleagues.[7]

Leniency Bias: How come it was okay when he did it?

Objective rules are no guarantee of objectivity, if rules are applied leniently to men but rigidly to women, a pattern called leniency bias.

When it comes to equipment order, we have a budget, and men just go out, make purchases, hand in the receipts and get reimbursed. But when her computer crashed, she had to haggle and go through procedures to get her one desktop replaced, even though a man in the department just bought two computers without prior protocols and was reimbursed.

Polarized Evaluations: When she is good she is very very good, but...

While superstar women may get outstanding evaluations, women who are merely excellent tend to get sharply lower evaluations than comparable men.[8]

Loose Lips: When gender bias is open and explicit

Often gender bias is surprisingly open and explicit.

One of my friends was teaching the first course that engineers take in physics. And engineers apparently don’t like these courses. She was leaving class and she heard these two students saying, “Can you believe it? They gave us a woman to teach this class!” I mean, they were just irate. “How could they possibly have done this to us? This is awful!” The students were really negative about it and she was a wonderful teacher. She’s now gone to another university.

Double Jeopardy for Women of Color

African-American women may face racial as well as gender stereotypes, forcing them to work even harder for equal footing. Asian or Asian-American women, often assumed to be passive and deferential, may also face “double jeopardy.”

[We need] to prove ourselves as women in computing, but in Asian culture, women are usually perceived to be quiet and not very outgoing, so it’s contradictory with that behavior that you need to prove yourself in order to get recognition and have people think that you are knowledgeable.