Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research

Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research This article reviews theory and research on double standards, namely, the use of different requirements for the inference of possession of an attribute, depending on the individuals being assessed. The article focuses on double standards for competence in task groups and begins by examining how status characteristics (e.g. gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic class) become a basis for stricter standards for the lower status person. I also discuss other bases for this practice (e.g. personality characteristics, allocated rewards, sentiments of either like or dislike). Next, I describe double standards in the inference of other types of valued attributes (e.g. beauty, morality, mental health) and examine the relationship between these practices and competence double standards. The article concludes with a discussion of “reverse” double standards for competence, namely, the practice of applying more lenient ability standards to lower status individuals. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Annual Review of Sociology Annual Reviews

Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research

Annual Review of Sociology , Volume 26 (1) – Aug 1, 2000

Loading next page...
 
/lp/annual-reviews/double-standards-for-competence-theory-and-research-IbWF16jDTX

References (61)

Publisher
Annual Reviews
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved
Subject
Review Articles
ISSN
0360-0572
eISSN
1545-2115
DOI
10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.21
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article reviews theory and research on double standards, namely, the use of different requirements for the inference of possession of an attribute, depending on the individuals being assessed. The article focuses on double standards for competence in task groups and begins by examining how status characteristics (e.g. gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic class) become a basis for stricter standards for the lower status person. I also discuss other bases for this practice (e.g. personality characteristics, allocated rewards, sentiments of either like or dislike). Next, I describe double standards in the inference of other types of valued attributes (e.g. beauty, morality, mental health) and examine the relationship between these practices and competence double standards. The article concludes with a discussion of “reverse” double standards for competence, namely, the practice of applying more lenient ability standards to lower status individuals.

Journal

Annual Review of SociologyAnnual Reviews

Published: Aug 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.