FEMALE ADMINISTRATORS: A CRACK IN THE GLASS CEILING

Susan Bon Reis I. Phillip Young

The Pennsylvania State The Ohio StateUniversity

University

James C. JuryChristian County School District

2

Abstract

This experimental study investigates the effects of gender of

the evaluator, gender of the applicant, and gender of the

reference source at the screening stage of the selection

process. Specifically, male and female principals were asked

to evaluate resumes and reference letters of hypothetical

male and female applicants for the focal position of

assistant principal. In the context of selection of an

assistant principal, the authors hypothesized that male

principals would prefer male applicants and female principals

would prefer female applicants. This hypothesis was based on

the sex similarity-attraction paradigm1. The sex similarity-

attraction paradigm suggests that same-sex applicants will be

regarded as more similar than opposite-sex applicants

(Gallois, Callan, & Palmer, 1992) and that applicants who are

perceived as similar will be evaluated favorably (Cardy &

Dobbins, 1986).

1 The term sex similarity is used rather than gender similarity because the authors of the article cited had used sex similarity in their discussion.

3

Finally, although the authors anticipated that sex

similarity-attraction would support an interaction effect

between gender of applicant and gender of rater, as

strengthened by gender of the reference letter source, the

findings did not support this interaction. In fact, the main

effect for gender of applicant indicates that hypothetical

female administrator candidates are evaluated significantly

higher than hypothetical male administrator candidates. This

is contrary to about half of past selection research that

suggested female applicants are given lower evaluations than

male applicants. Thus, these results may be an indication

that the evaluations of female applicants for administrative

positions are improving to the extent that female applicants

were more likely to be offered employment interviews than

male applicants.

4

"Teaching is a good job for a woman but a career with

prospects for men"

(H. Burgess, 1989, p. 90)

Few would contest the fact that public school districts

need the best leadership possible as America strives to meet

the challenges of the 21st century. Public outcries for

accountability of school districts are frequently linked with

demands to attract higher quality educators to the public

schools. Thus, it is alarming to discover that both female

and minority populations are systematically overlooked or

blocked from access to public school administrative positions

by restrictive recruitment and selection processes (U.S.

Department of Education, 1992).

Data indicate that the number of male principals far

exceeds the number of female principals. According to the

U.S. Department of Education (1996) only 35% of principals

are females. The Department of Education reported also that

the distribution of teachers by gender reveals 25% of

teachers were males and 75% of teachers were females. Thus, a

5

majority of the teaching force, females, is categorically

excluded from and denied the power associated with leadership

positions, such as the principalship, in public education.

Further evidence would suggest, in fact, that females

are continuing to seek these leadership positions. Several

state departments as well as published research studies

indicate that the number of females seeking and obtaining

principal certification exceeds the number of males (Yeakey,

Johnston, & Adkinson, 1986). This same research stream

indicates also that females are not only becoming certified

for administrative positions but are actively seeking

positions at the building level.

Although females are actively seeking administrative

positions, the data indicate that in many instances, male

applicants have been selected while female applicants have

failed to attain administrative positions. These data tend to

support an extensive review of literature, which suggests

that women are evaluated less positively than equally

qualified men (Arvey, 1979). Past literature has failed,

however, to explore the effect of sex similarity on

6

evaluations of applicants (Graves & Powell, 1995).

Consequently, this study will examine the effect of sex

similarity by examining whether or not, in the context of

selection of an assistant principal, male principals prefer

male applicants and female principals prefer female

applicants.

Selection Process

Several investigators have described selection as a

multistage process including a pre-interview stage, an

interview stage, and a post-interview stage (Dipboye, 1992,

Macan & Dipboye, 1990). Accordingly, the selection process

encompasses the gathering of information (the pre-interview

stage), the face-to-face interaction (the interview stage),

and the evaluation of qualifications of an applicant (the

post-interview stage). During the pre-interview stage an

evaluator will form initial perceptions of an applicant based

on review of a resume and letters of recommendation (Dipboye,

1992). It is likely that these perceptions will influence

the decisions made by an evaluator throughout the selection

7

process and thus may have significant impact on the final

hiring decision.

Ultimately, the final hiring decision an applicant

desires would be an offer of employment. However, an offer of

employment is unlikely to be given unless an applicant is

successful at all stages of the selection process. At

present, research has focused primarily on how well females

fare at the interview stage and has failed to focus on how

well females fare at the pre-interview stage. Screening

decisions are made at the pre-interview stage and serve as a

precursor for interview decisions. Consequently, our focus in

this study is on screening decisions for entry level building

administrators, such as the assistant principalship.

Screening Decisions

Research has shown that applicant decisions are stage

specific process (Dipboye, Fromkin, & Wiback, 1975; Rosen &

Jerdee, 1974). That is, factors found to influence screening

decisions are different from factors found to influence

interview decisions. Because of these consistent findings

concerning stage specific stimuli influencing the cognitive

8

process of the organizational representative, researchers

have focused their research efforts on a particular stage of

the selection process.

At the screening stage of the selection process,

applicants are required to submit paper credentials to school

districts for initial consideration for employment (Brown &

Campion, 1994). These credentials include placement files

containing resumes and reference letters. During this stage,

a reviewer will determine if an applicant's credentials

warrant the extension of an offer to interview the applicant.

Thus, a positive evaluation of the resume and reference

letter is critical if an applicant is to make it beyond the

screening stage and is to receive a job offer.

Reference Letter Source

Past research has indicated that 82% to 99% of various

companies reported using some form of reference information

(Muchinsky, 1979). This is reaffirmed by an examination of

typical college placement files, which uniformly include

reference letters in the file materials. Thus, it is useful

to look at the contribution of this variable to the

9

selection process. In addition, a reference letter was

included as a third variable to strengthen the manipulation

of perceived similarity for an interaction between gender of

the evaluator and gender of the applicant.

Research has indicated that information contained in

the reference reveals as much about the letter writer as

about the person being recommended (Knouse, 1983). Knouse

suggested that the reference letter reader generalizes

attributions from the letter writer to attributions for the

applicant. For instance, status of the letter writer may

affect the evaluation of an applicant. Consequently, source

of the reference letter, that is, a male or female writer,

may contribute to and even intensify the interpersonal

attraction between evaluator and applicant.

Kryger and Shikiar (1978) hypothesized that "both the

sex of the person writing the letter of recommendation and

the sex of the applicant would affect the applicant's

likelihood of obtaining the job" (p. 309). They suggested

that reference letters written by women might be discounted

because of gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes have been

10

documented by research, which has shown that women are

perceived as being subjective and illogical.

In their study three independent variables were

manipulated, gender of the letter writer (male or female),

gender of the applicant (male or female), and favorability

of the letter of recommendation (favorable or unfavorable).

While gender of the letter writer had no significant main

effect on the dependent variables, a significant three-way

interaction occurred for this variable with favorabliity of

the letter and gender of the applicant. Specifically, if a

female letter writer favorably evaluated a female applicant

who turned out to perform poorly, significantly greater

feedback was warranted than if she had made the same error

when evaluating a male applicant. These results were

contrary to the author's expectation that there may be a

subtle form of discrimination based on the gender of the

letter writer.

In a study by Bredeson (1982) the impact of reference

letters on the overall evaluation of candidates was

considered. The results revealed no relationship of length,

11

but did reveal one for tone of information in reference

letters to the overall evaluation of applicants. This

evidence suggests that reference letters contribute

minimally to the evaluation of applicants. In light of the

uniform use of reference letters and the numerous queries

about their influence on decisions made during the selection

process, further investigation is warranted.

Interpersonal Attraction

In an investigation of the relationship between

interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity, Byrne

(1961) reported that attitude similarity influenced the

evaluation of an individual on such attributes as

intelligence and morality. Specifically, he concluded that

individuals with similar attitudes are positively attracted

to each other. Using Byrne's model, researchers have

continued to investigate other potential moderators of the

relationship between interpersonal attraction and similarity.

Rand and Wexley (1975) investigated the effect of

interpersonal attraction due to manipulation of biographical

similarity of evaluator and applicant. Their review of past

12

research revealed that "high evaluation of a job candidate

bears a positive relationship to the degree of perceived

similarity" of an applicant to the evaluator (p. 536). The

effect of biographically similar information on the dependent

measure of desirability as a work partner was statistically

significant (F = 12.48, p =.001) with a biographically

similar individual being preferred as a work partner. These

authors concluded that evaluations of an applicant are not

distinguished from interpersonal attraction to the applicant.

Baskett (1973) suggested that an applicant would be

evaluated favorably when the applicant is perceived to have a

similar attitude to the evaluator. To test his hypothesis,

he manipulated attitudinal similarity of the applicant to the

evaluator. Significant main effects were found for

attitudinal similarity, which contributed to the

recommendation of a higher starting salary for the

attitudinally similar applicant. The results revealed also

that the attitudinally similar applicant was perceived by the

evaluator as more likely to be recommended for employment

than the attitudinally dissimilar applicant.

13

Similarity-Attraction Paradigm

A crucial determining factor of the interpersonal

attraction theory is the variable that is often referred to

as similarity. At the screening stage of the selection

process, similarity may have a subtle influence on the

evaluation of an applicant by the potential employer. The

extent of influence may depend on a combination of variables.

Researchers have examined similarity in conjunction with

variables such as gender (Graves & Powell, 1995), race

(Wexley & Nemeroff, 1974), attitude (Baskett, 1973), and

demographic characteristics (Raza & Carpenter, 1987). When

evaluators perceive themselves to be similar to applicants on

characteristics such as these, the studies have revealed that

this perceived similarity has an influence on the degree of

interpersonal attraction to an applicant. Finally, when an

evaluator is attracted to an applicant based on the perceived

similarity, the applicant's evaluation is likely to reflect

the degree of interpersonal attraction.

In the context of the employment interview, the

similarity-attraction paradigm suggests that, "demographic

14

similarity between the recruiter and applicant on

characteristics such as gender leads to perceived similarity

in attitudes and values which in turn leads to interpersonal

attraction between the recruiter and applicant" (Graves &

Powell, 1995, p. 86). Graves and Powell suggested that

strong interpersonal attraction between evaluator and

applicant will lead to a high evaluation of the applicant.

Interestingly, this study revealed that "female recruiters

saw male applicants as more similar to themselves than were

female applicants" (Graves & Powell, 1995, 94). Thus, male

applicants received more favorable evaluations than female

applicants did.

Previous research has shown that individuals are

attracted to people who they perceive as similar to them, and

that this attraction or liking affects performance ratings

(Cardy & Dobbins, 1986). Performance evaluation research is

pertinent to the selection process because "an interview is

essentially a performance evaluation of how well the

applicant responds to an interviewer's questions" (Lin,

Dobbins & Farh, 1992, p. 363). If sex-similarity moderates

15

the degree of interpersonal attraction between the evaluator

and applicant, then sex-similarity may affect also

performance or interview evaluations.

In their investigation of the effect of perceptual

similarity and gender on performance appraisals, Pulakos and

Wexley (1983) manipulated four independent variables: (1)

perceptual similarity of subordinate; (2) perceptual

similarity of manager; (3) gender of subordinate; and (4)

gender of manager. Manager-subordinate dyads were created;

each dyad represented either a similar group (manager and

subordinate perceived themselves as similar) or a dissimilar

group (manager and subordinate perceived themselves as

dissimilar). Examination of the dyads revealed that

perception of overall similarity of subordinate and of

manager resulted in significantly higher performance

appraisals.

This study also revealed that gender of the subordinate

affected the performance appraisal. In particular, the main

effect for gender of the subordinate revealed that females

received higher ratings than males on the performance scale

16

from both male and female reviewers. Results of this study

indicate that gender of the evaluatee influences performance

ratings, but that gender of the evaluator does not influence

the rating.

Gallois, Callan, and McKenzie Palmer (1992) examined the

influence of the gender of job applicants, as well as the

gender of interviewers, on hiring decisions. This study

revealed an interaction between interviewer gender and

applicant gender. Specifically, female interviewers perceived

female candidates to be more similar to themselves than male

candidates, but male interviewers did not differentiate

between the candidates on the basis of gender. These results

suggest that sex-similarity attraction is a possible

explanation for interaction effects between female evaluators

and female applicants on decisions to hire or promote.

Research has revealed conflicting support for the

existence of gender discrimination in the selection and/or

evaluation process. Sex-similarity attraction suggests that

gender influences interpersonal attraction and perceived

similarity. Thus, research should continue to consider

17

gender in conjunction with other possible variables that may

be affecting decisions to hire or promote.

For instance at the screening stage, similarity between

an applicant and potential employer may be based on gender.

It is unknown whether sex-similarity will lead to

interpersonal attraction and whether this attraction will

then be applicable to the screening stage of the selection

process. Thus, the present study attempted to examine the

influence of sex-similarity and interpersonal attraction on

decisions made during the screening stage of the selection

process.

Method

Subjects

All public high school principals (14,238) throughout

the 48 contiguous United States constituted the population

for this investigation. The study used a list of 272

participant names that were generated using a stratified

random procedure by Market Data Retrieval (1996). A total of

150 high school principals responded, representing a 55%

response rate.

18

The average age of participants is 48.69 years. All

participants had previous experience as teachers (average of

17.59 years of teaching experience) prior to their employment

as high school principals. Respondents indicated that they

had taught in an average of three school districts. The

principals participating reported also that they had an

average of 12 years of administrative experience. In their

present administrative role, the respondent principals had an

average student enrollment of 826 in their building.

Insert Table 1 about here

Materials

Participants were sent a packet of information

containing an introductory letter, a job description for the

focal position, a resume for a hypothetical applicant, a

reference letter for that applicant, an applicant evaluation

form, and a demographic questionnaire. Each participant was

asked to review the resume and reference letter of a

hypothetical applicant for a position in his or her building

as an assistant principal. The resume and reference letter

19

each varied by gender, resulting in eight different

experimental or treatment conditions. An evaluation form

was provided to participants so that they could record their

reaction to the hypothetical applicant packet.

The focal position utilized in the job description, an

assistant principal in a High School setting, was held

constant across all experimental conditions. The job

description used was an abbreviated form of a model job

description provided by the National School Boards

Association (National School Boards Association, 1993).

Each participant was provided the same job description along

with the applicant materials.

To provide an indication of the external validity for

the procedures used in this study, principals were requested

to indicate if they use paper credentials to screen

applicants. In response to this query, principals

overwhelmingly indicated that they do, indeed, use paper

credentials to screen applicants for the assistant

principalship. In fact, all respondents, bar one, indicated

20

that they use paper credentials during the screening stage of

applicant selection.

Procedures

The independent variables, each containing two levels,

were gender of applicant, gender of evaluator, and gender of

the reference letter writer. These manipulations produced a

2 X 2 X 2 completely crossed factorial design. This design

yielded a total of eight cells.

Participants of a specific gender were selected at

random and were randomly assigned to one of four experimental

conditions. To ensure a systematic bias was not introduced,

and to meet statistical assumptions, male and female

principals were randomly assigned in equal proportions to one

of four information packets. The four packets of information

reflected all possible combinations of the independent

variables, applicant gender and reference writer gender.

Each null hypothesis was tested by performing a

multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). To determine

sample size, a power analysis was performed according to

procedures recommended by Cohen (1977, pp. 396-400). The

21

number of subjects (N=136) was specified by the power

analysis based on a desired medium effect size (omega

squared = .25), a defined level of significance (alpha

= .05), and a specific power level (power = .80). However,

the response rate varied slightly across treatment

conditions and 15 respondents from each treatment condition

were randomly selected in order to achieve a balanced design

(N=120) (Zar, 1984). An alpha level of .05 was set as the

decisional criterion for rejecting each multivariate

hypothesis.

Two dependent variables were used in this study. Both

variables were operationalized via a candidate evaluation

form used for screening teacher applicants (Young & Joseph,

1989; Young & Pounder, 1985). The form was modified slightly

for use in screening applicants for the position of assistant

principal.

The form consisted of a total of six criteria on which

the hypothetical applicant was evaluated. One of the

dependent variables was the probability of being granted an

interview. A Likert-type scale ranging from one through ten

22

was used, with a higher rating indicating a more favorable

evaluation of the applicant.

The other five criteria on the form comprised the other

dependent variable. A composite score was computed using the

following five criteria: (1) communication skill, (2)

overall school contribution, (3) disciplinary ability, (4)

personal warmth, and (5) growth potential (Young & Allison,

1982; Young & Joseph, 1989; Young & McMurry, 1986; Young &

Pounder, 1985). A four point Likert-type scale was used for

each criterion, with a higher evaluation indicating a more

favorable response.

A pilot study2 was done to assess the reliability of

this dependent variable. Coefficient alpha was computed with

the five criteria that comprised one of the dependent

variables on the evaluation form. The resultant coefficient

alpha for reactions of subjects was .80. This is within the

acceptable ranges suggested by Nunnally (1967).

2 Participants in the pilot study were experienced educators and advanced graduate students in the Department of Education Policy Studies(N=48).

23

Ratings provided by actual study participants on each

criterion were summed to form a composite score.

Coefficient alpha was used to assess the internal

consistency of the composite score. The composite score

possessed adequate internal consistency (alpha = .79) as

suggested by Nunnally (1967).

To assess for a treatment by response rate interaction,

a chi square statistic was calculated. Because an equal

number of principals were assigned at random to each

treatment condition, the expected value used for analysis is

the average response rate (E=18.4) across treatment

conditions. The obtained chi square (X2= 3.93) indicates

that response rates were not systematically related to

treatment conditions.

One significant multivariate effect was detected for

applicant gender. To determine the multivariate effect, an

examination was made for each univariate analysis involving

applicant gender. This examination revealed that gender of

the applicant was statistically significant with both

dependent variables. Given the statistically significant

24

effects detected with both dependent variables, an

examination was made on the marginal means. This examination

revealed that females were more likely than males both to

receive a higher evaluation and to receive an interview

offer.

Insert Table 2 about here

Given the rejection of the multivariate null

hypothesis, an examination was made for each univariate

analysis involving the separate dependent variables. For

both univariate analyses, the main effect for gender of the

hypothetical candidate was statistically significant at

the .05 level for alpha. Across both dependent variables,

the direction of mean differences was the same.

Hypothetical female administrator candidates are evaluated

significantly higher than hypothetical male administrator

candidates.

Approximately 4% of the variation in actual female and

male principals’ ratings of candidate qualifications are due

to gender of the hypothetical administrator candidate.

Similarly, approximately 5% of the variation in actual

25

female and male principals’ perceived probability of

extending an interview offer to candidates is accounted for

by the gender of the hypothetical candidate.

Discussion

Data reported by the U.S. Department of Education (1996)

reveal that 35% of principals are females and 65% of

principals are men. These statistics reveal a wide disparity

between the number of females and the number of males who

occupy administrative positions in public education,

particularly in the principalship. Past research has proposed

that gender preference is the primary reason for the small

proportion of educational administrative positions held by

females (Yeakey, Johnston, & Adkison, 1986; Frasher, Frasher

and Wims, 1982).

In spite of these statistics and of past research

suggesting the existence of gender discrimination against

female applicants (see e.g. Arvey, 1979; Cohen & Bunker,

1975; Heilman, Martell & Simon, 1988), the present study

revealed a preference for female applicants at the screening

stage of the selection process for an assistant

26

principalship. The preference for female over male

applicants at the screening stage of the selection process

appears to be unlikely given the anticipated influence of

sex similarity on the selection process. As noted earlier,

interpersonal attraction theory suggests that sex similarity

of evaluator and applicant will result in a higher evaluation

of the “similar sex” applicant. Because

selection is a cognitive decision-making process, similarity-

attraction on the basis of sex was expected to influence the

formation of decisions during the selection process.

Specifically, this study investigated the formation of

decisions during the screening or pre-interview stage of the

selection process, when information is evaluated and a

decision is made whether or not to extend an offer to

interview. The similarity-attraction paradigm was expected

to support an interaction effect between gender of applicant

and gender of rater, as strengthened by gender of the

reference letter source. As indicated, the findings did not

support the anticipated interaction effect.

27

Graves and Powell (1995) revealed a similar finding in

their examination of face-to-face interviews. Contrary to

expectations, their study revealed that "recruiters saw

opposite-sex applicants as more similar to themselves than

same-sex applicants" (Graves and Powell, 1995, p. 94).

Graves and Powell offer social identity theory as one

possible explanation for these contrary findings. It

suggests that individuals will distance themselves from

their own group in an attempt to join a higher-status group

and to maintain positive social identities.

Other implications may arise from these results. First,

it may be that females are being pursued to fill an existing

void in public school administration. That is, because the

present population of principals reveals about a 3 to 1

disparity between male and female principals, there may be an

intentional effort to increase the number of females in all

administrative positions. Consequently, these results may be

an indication that the evaluations of female applicants for

administrative positions are improving.

28

A second explanation may involve the increased

sensitivity of school administrators to legal aspects of the

selection process. School administrators must be

increasingly aware of numerous legal acts and regulations

that prohibit discriminatory employment practices. Thus,

administrators may also be more sensitive to the potential

influence of protected characteristics, such as gender, on

their decisions during the selection process. Finally,

findings from this study do not support past research which

has indicated that gender preference is preventing female

applicants from at least attaining an interview for an

administrative role, specifically the assistant

principalship. Thus, future research should investigate

whether similarity-attraction influences decision-making at

other stages of the selection process.

In addition, gender is but one of many variables which

can lead to similarity-attraction. Other variables, such as

biographical, social or economical differences may lead also

to interpersonal attraction among individuals. Future

29

research should investigate these variables as potential

influences on decision-making during the selection process.

Finally, the evaluation of resumes and related materials

is likely to be an integral component of all selection

decisions (Brown & Campion, 1994). Although the importance of

this initial stage of applicant evaluation should not be

understated, it also should not be overstated. Specifically,

an applicant who is evaluated positively during this initial

stage is unlikely to receive a job offer until she or he

successfully navigates the face-to-face interaction (the

interview). Given the subjective nature of the interview

(Harris, 1989), sex similarity-attraction may be more

appropriately applied to the interpretation of decisions made

by evaluators during the interview stage, rather than during

the screening stage of the selection process.

30

TABLE 1

CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPATING PUBLICHIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS N=150

Variable N Mean SD Range

Age (Years) 137 48.69 5.56 29

Gender (a) 150 1.48 .50 1

Teaching Experience (Years) 145 17.59 8.19 34.5

Number of Districts In Which Taught 145 2.97 4.18 34

Administrative Experience (Years) 145 11.89 6.43 31

Number of Districts In Which Served 144 1.69 .95 6

Student Enrollment 150 826.26 663.58 4351

Use Resumes inScreening Process (b) 144 1.99 .12 1

(a) Scored: Male = 1, Female = 2

31

(b) Scored: No = 1, Yes = 2

NOTE: N’s vary because participants did not respond to all

items.

32

TABLE 2

Analysis of Variance Table

Source Composite InterviewMultivariate

Evaluation ProbabilityAnalysis

MS DF F MS DF F F

A 5.21 1 .97 13.67 1 2.971.57

B 28.03 1 5.22(a)* 25.671 5.57(b)* 3.07*

C 18.41 1 3.43 16.50 13.58 2.00

A*B 8.53 1 1.59 .35 1 .081.27

A*C 4.41 1 .82 3.17 1 .69 .43

B*C 13.33 1 2.50 15.05 1 3.271.68

A*B*C .30 1 .06 .92 1 .20 .11

Error 5.37 112 4.61 112

A=Evaluator Gender; B=Applicant Gender; C= Reference Source Gender

33

N=120*p<.05

(a) Eta=.04(b) Eta=.05

34

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arvey, R.D. (1979). Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological aspects. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 736-765.

Baskett, G.D. (1973). Interview Decisions as Determined by Competency and Attitude Similarity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 343-345.

Bredeson, P.V. (1982). The Effects of Letters of Recommendation on the Teacher Selection Interview Process. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Brown, B.K. and Campion, M.A. (1994). Biodata Phenomenology: Recruiters' Perceptions and Use of Biographical Information in Resume Screening. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(6), 897-908.

Burgess, H. (1989a). A sort of career: women in primary schools. In C. Skelton (ed.) (1989), Whatever happens to Little Women? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Byrne, D. (1961). Interpersonal Attraction and Attitude Similarity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(3),713-715.

Cardy, R.L. and Dobbins, G.H. (1986). Affect and Appraisal Accuracy: Liking as an Integral Dimension in Evaluating Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 672-678.

Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

35

Cohen, J. and Bunker, (1975). Subtle Effects of Sex Role Stereotypes on Recruiters' Hiring Decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(5), 566-572.

Dipboye, R.L. (1992). Selection Interviews: Process Perspectives Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co.

Dipboye, R.L., Fromkin, H. and Wiback, K. (1975). Relative importance of applicant sex, attractiveness, and scholastic standing in evaluation of job applicant resumes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 39-43.

Frasher, J.M., Frasher, R.S., and Wims, F.B. (1982). Sex Role Stereotyping in School Superintendent's Personnel Decisions. Sex Roles, 8(3), 261-268.

Gallois, C., Callan, V.J., and McKenzie Palmer, J. (1992). The Influence of applicant Communication Style and Interviewer Characteristics on Hiring Decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(13), 1041-1060.

Graves, L.M. and Powell, G.N. (1995). The Effects of Sex Similarity on Recruiters' Evaluations of Actual Applicants: ATest of the Similarity-Attraction Paradigm, Personnel Psychology, 48, 85-97.

Harris, M.M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691-726.

Heilman, M.E., Martell, R.F., and Simon, M.C. (1988). The Vagaries of Sex Bias: Conditions Regulating the Undervaluation, Equivaluation, and Overvaluation of Female Job Applicants. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 98-110.

Knouse, S.B. (1983). The Letter of Recommendation: Specificity and Favorability of Information. Personnel Psychology, 36, 331-341.

36

Kryger, B.R. and Shikiar, R. (1978). Sexual Discrimination inthe Use of Letters of Recommendation: A Case of Reverse Discrimination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63(3), 309-314.

Lin, T., Dobbins, G.H., and Farh, J. (1992). A Field Study ofRace and Age Similarity Effects on Interview Ratings in Conventional and Situational Interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(3), 363-371.

Macan, T.M. and Dipboye, R.L. (1990). The Relationship of Interviewers' preinterview Impressions to Selection and Recruitment Outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 43, 745-768.

Muchinsky, P.M. (1979). The use of Reference Reports in Personnel Selection: A Review and Evaluation. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 287-297.

Nunnally, J.C. (1967). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGrawHill.

Pulakos, E.D. and Wexley, K.N. (1983). The Relationship AmongPerceptual Similarity, Sex, and Performance Ratings in Manager-Subordinate Dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 129-139.

Rand, T.M. and Wexley, K.N. (1975). Demonstration of the Effect, "Similar to Me," in Simulated Employment Interviews. Psychological Reports, 36, 535-544.

Raza, S.M. and Carpenter, B. N. (1987). A model of hiring decisions in real employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 596-603.

Rosen, B. and Jerdee, T.H. (1974). Effects of Applicants Sex and Difficulty of Job on Evaluations of Candidates for Managerial Positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(4), 511-512.

37

U.S. Department of Education. (1992). Strengthening Support &Recruitment of Women & Minorities to Positions in Education Administration (OERI Publication No. PIP 92-1828). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Schools and Staffing inthe United States: A Statistical Profile, 1993-94 (OERI Publication No. NCES 96-124). Washington, DC: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.

Wexley, K.N. and Nemeroff, W.F. (1974). The effects of racialprejudice, race of applicant, and biographical similarity on interviewer evaluations of job applicants. Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 66-78.

Yeakey, C.C., Johnston, G.S. and Adkison J.A. (1986). In Pursuit of Equity: A Review of Research on Minorities and Females in Educational Administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(3), 110-149.

Young, I.P. and Allison, B. (1982). Effects of Age, Experience, and Administrative Role of Administrators on Teacher Selection Decisions. Planning and changing, 13, 245-256.

Young, I.P. and Joseph, G. (1989). Effects of Chronological Age, Skill Obsolescence, Quality of Information, and focal Position on Evaluation by Principals. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 2, 43-57.

Young, I.P. and McMurry, B.R. (1986). Effects of chronological age, focal position, quality of information andquantity of information on screening decisions for teacher candidates. Journal of Research and Development in Education,19, 1-9.

Young, I.P. and Pounder, D.G. (1985). Salient Factors Affecting Decision Making in Simulated Teacher Selection

38

Interviews, Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 5(3), 216-233.

Zar, J.H. (1984). Biostatistical Analysis (2nd ed.). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

39