Individuals are typically more likely to continue to interact with people if they have a positive impression of them. This article shows how this sequential sampling feature of impression formation can explain several biases in impression formation. The underlying mechanism is the sample bias generated when the probability of interaction depends on current impressions. Because negative experiences decrease the probability of interaction, negative initial impressions are more stable than positive impressions. Negative initial impressions, however, are more likely to change for individuals who are frequently exposed to others. As a result, systematic differences in interaction patterns, due to social similarity or proximity, will produce systematic differences in impressions. This mechanism suggests an alternative explanation of several regularities in impression formation, including a negativity bias in impressions of outgroup members, systematic differences in performance evaluations, and more positive evaluations of proximate others.

Why most people disapprove of me: experience sampling in impression formation.

We propose models with an ascriptive characteristic generating earnings differentials and causing sectoral sorting, allowing us to distinguish among sources producing such differentials. We use longitudinal data on a large sample of graduates from one law school and measure beauty by rating matriculation photographs. (1) Betterlooking attorneys who graduated in the 1970s earned more than others after 5 years of practice, an effect that grew with experience. (2) Attorneys in the private sector are better‐looking than those in the public sector, differences that rise with age. These results support theories of dynamic sorting and customer behavior.

"Beauty, Productivity, and Discrimination: Lawyers’ Looks and Lucre." J. Lab. Econ. 16, no. 1 (1998): 172-201.

Using National Longitudinal Survey of Youth data, the authors analyze the determinants and consequences of a promotion among young workers. Most events that workers called "promotions" involved no change in position or duties, but were simply an upgrade of the current position. Typically, only one person was considered for the promotion. Men were more likely to be promoted than women, and whites more likely than blacks or Hispanics. The acquisition of company training and the receipt of a prior promotion were two of the most important predictors of promotion. Consequences of promotion included increased wages, training receipt, supervisory responsibilities, and increased job satisfaction. There is little evidence that promotion had a direct impact on job attachment.

What is a Promotion

This article revives the debate over whether women’s upward mobility prospects decline as they climb organizational hierarchies. Although this proposition is a core element of the “glass ceiling” metaphor, it has failed to gain strong support in previous research. The article establishes a firm theoretical foundation for expecting an increasing female disadvantage, with an eye toward defining the scope conditions and extending the model to upper‐level external hires. The approach is illustrated in an empirical setting that meets the proposed scope conditions: corporate law firms in the United States. Results confirm that in this setting, the female mobility disadvantage is greater at higher organizational levels in the case of internal promotions, but not in the case of external hires.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/595950

Hierarchical rank and women's organizational mobility: glass ceilings in corporate law firms.

Increasing numbers of women are attracted to careers in the professional services. However, when their progress is considered to partner positions, it is found that they are not advancing to the levels anticipated. When the literature in relation to the partnership promotion process is explored, we find explanatory models are rare, and rarer yet is work that considers the impact of sex bias on the process. The article adds to the limited work available by presenting findings from a behavioural process perspective through an empirical study with male and female management consultants in a professional services firm which indicates that the promotion to partner process is indeed sex biased. Two areas of disadvantage for women are identified: the presence of a self-managed career advancement process necessitating a proactive approach to demonstrating individual contribution; and the need to ‘fit’ a prevailing model of success within the firm which is a masculine model and is more problematic for women. The article calls for a differentiated treatment of the glass ceiling phenomenon, capable of capturing disadvantage accruing from societally based factors and sector-based factors. The implications of the findings for future research and professional service firms are discussed.

/pdf/a-study-of-the-promotion-to-partner-process-in-a-58z01hhjx7.pdf

A Study of the Promotion to Partner Process in a Professional Services Firm: How Women are Disadvantaged

This paper analyzes the turnover and promotion of male and female lawyers, using data on two cohorts of lawyers; one which entered law firms between 1969 and 1973, and the other entering between 1980 and 1983. This study considers whether law firm promotion decisions have differed for women, and if so, whether these differences have declined over time. A competing risks duration model is employed to capture the link between the lawyer's decision to stay or leave and the firm's decision to grant or deny promotion. We find that over the entire sample period, women are considerably less likely to be promoted and slightly more likely to leave the firm without being promoted. However, we also find that the parametric differential between men and women in partnership hazards has been reduced substantially, and in the most general of our specifications, eliminated across the two cohorts. In contrast, the gap between male and female job turnover rates does not appear to change over time. We find that the gap between males and females in the cumulative partnership rate at seven years of experience falls from 32 to 14 percent. The turnover gap increases about 0.2 percent, with females slightly more likely to exit from the firm in the later period.

Glenn T. Sueyoshi

Papers

Turnover and Promotion of Lawyers An Inquiry into Gender Differences