Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research

Article Properties
  • Language
    English
  • Publication Date
    2000/08/01
  • Indian UGC (Journal)
  • Refrences
    79
  • Citations
    310
  • Martha Foschi Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z1;
Abstract
Cite
Foschi, Martha. “Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research”. Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 26, no. 1, 2000, pp. 21-42, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.21.
Foschi, M. (2000). Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 21-42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.21
Foschi M. Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research. Annual Review of Sociology. 2000;26(1):21-42.
Journal Categories
Social Sciences
Social Sciences
Sociology (General)
Description

Are we truly evaluating everyone by the same yardstick? This article explores the pervasive phenomenon of double standards for competence, where different requirements are applied when assessing individuals based on factors like status characteristics. Gender and ethnicity can significantly influence the assessment of competence. Focusing on task groups, the review examines how status characteristics (e.g., gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic class) lead to stricter standards for lower-status individuals. It also discusses other factors, such as personality characteristics and allocated rewards, that contribute to this practice. The review goes on to describe double standards in inferring other valued attributes (e.g., beauty, morality) and examines their relationship to competence double standards. This article concludes with a discussion of "reverse" double standards, where more lenient ability standards are applied to lower-status individuals. This analysis has implications for understanding social inequality, bias, and discrimination in various settings.

Published in the Annual Review of Sociology, this article perfectly aligns with the journal's objective of providing comprehensive overviews of significant topics within the field of sociology. By exploring the theory and research on double standards for competence, this review offers a valuable synthesis of knowledge, contributing to a deeper understanding of social inequality and bias.

Refrences
Citations
Citations Analysis
The first research to cite this article was titled Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. and was published in 2002. The most recent citation comes from a 2024 study titled Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. . This article reached its peak citation in 2022 , with 30 citations.It has been cited in 191 different journals, 5% of which are open access. Among related journals, the Social Science Research cited this research the most, with 10 citations. The chart below illustrates the annual citation trends for this article.
Citations used this article by year