Search for: All records

ABSTRACT This review highlights how research aimed at increasing women's interest and achievement in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields is critical to U.S. national interests. STEM expertise undergirds national security and the knowledge‐based national economy. However, the U.S. faces a STEM talent crisis, with job growth projected to exceed the number of individuals with STEM expertise. Addressing the STEM labor shortage requires continuing to support those who have historically pursued STEM while also seeking to broaden who is attracted to and flourishes in STEM. Behavioral scientists have focused on understanding the importance of feeling a sense of belonging in STEM, with research showing that feeling personally accepted, respected, and included as one's authentic self in STEM facilitates success among all students. At the same time, this research has identified numerous factors that selectively decrease women's sense of belonging in STEM, creating an additional barrier among women to success in STEM. Fortunately, the identification of these barriers also reveals how to increase belonging among all students, and among women specifically. Continuing to support research on broadening participation in STEM is thus critical for the safety, prosperity, and health of all Americans. 

Academic AbstractAdvantaged group allies have multiple motives for supporting equality, raising questions about their sincerity. We draw upon the covariation model of attributions to explain how disadvantaged group members make attributions about whether advantaged group “allies” are sincerely motivated to empower the disadvantaged group. We propose an Attribution-Identity Model of Sincerity (AIMS) which posits that disadvantaged group members view advantaged group members as sincere allies when they support equality in the presence of inhibitory causes and in the absence of facilitative causes, exceed expectations for the advantaged group, and provide support across time and contexts. Furthermore, those who identify strongly with their disadvantaged group and perceive intergroup inequality as illegitimate are most motivated to ascertain the sincerity of advantaged group members’ allyship. AIMS suggests how members of disadvantaged groups seek to maximize benefits and minimize risks of advantaged group members’ allyship. Public AbstractAdvantaged group members (e.g., men, White Americans) can act as allies for disadvantaged groups (e.g., women, Americans belonging to minoritized racial groups), but members of disadvantaged groups sometimes have reason to question whether their motives are sincere. We argue that members of disadvantaged groups view advantaged group allies as more sincere when they support equality when they do not stand to benefit from it and even when they stand to lose. We also argue that members of disadvantaged groups view advantaged group allies as more sincere when their support for equality goes beyond expectations for their advantaged group, consistently over time, and is not limited to particular situations, forms, or contexts. Members of disadvantaged groups like sincere allies, want to work with them, and feel safe around them. Sincere allies also serve as moral exemplars to other members of advantaged groups. 

Four studies (N = 1554) examine whether women believe a man's allyship is sincere or not when they are exposed to new (and sometimes counter) allyship cues. These studies demonstrate that women's perceptions of a man's allyship sincerity influences whether the man is viewed as an identity-safety cue for women. Women reported a higher sense of identity-safety and likelihood of retention in a male-dominated workplace when an ally-identified man confronted (vs agreed with or ignored) sexism which was mediated by women's perceptions of the man's sincerity. An ally-identified man who ignored sexism was perceived as equally insincere and unlikely to promote women's identity-safety as an ally-identified man who agreed with a sexist comment (Study 1). Study 2 demonstrates that perceiving an ally-identified man as sincerely motivated determines his impact on women's identity-safety and retention. Studies 3–4 examine how the order in which women learn of a man's stated motivation to identify as an ally and his behavioral response to workplace sexism inform women's perceptions of the man's sincerity, hypocrisy, women's anticipated workplace treatment, and broader perceptions of the organization. These results indicate that perceived sincerity amplifies the positive effects of ally-identified men on women's identity-safety in male-dominated workplaces, whereas indications of insincerity severely undermine the extent to which ally-identified men signal identity-safety to women. 

Highly publicized instances of social injustice have raised awareness of inequities and motivated people with advantaged identities to work to end oppression and advocate for members of marginalized groups — in other words, to act as ‘allies’. When successful, engaging in allyship can promote marginalized individuals’ belonging and well-being. However, actions meant to convey allyship can be ineffective or harmful. Thus, it is important to understand how people might act as effective allies — that is, how they might enact allyship efforts that marginalized group members identify as meaningful and that promote psychological benefits for these groups. In this Review, we outline a framework of effective allyship that posits four key and related components: awareness, authentic motivation, action orientation and all-inclusivity. More specifically, taking part in allyship entails acknowledging systemic bias and privileged identities, being motivated by personal values, engaging in high-effort and consistent ally actions, and supporting all members of a marginalized group, including those with multiply marginalized identities. We discuss research supporting the importance of each element, focusing on work with marginalized individuals, and we describe ally interventions. When carefully considered and tailored to relevant marginalized groups, these four components are crucial to acting as an effective ally and fostering welcoming climates. 

Men can make important contributions to gender equality, but a variety of obstacles impede their engagement with feminism. In this article, we propose a self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000) approach to supporting men’s feminist engagement. We argue that men are more likely to engage with feminism more consistently and effectively if they internalize feminist goals and incorporate them into their sense of self, that is, if they develop autonomous motivation. We argue further that men are more likely to develop autonomous motivation if their engagement with feminism satisfies basic psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence. We suggest a variety of strategies to meet these needs, among them: framing feminism as a men’s issue, considering men’s viewpoints and values, portraying feminism as consistent with gender and masculine norms, encouraging positive interactions with feminist women, and presenting other feminist men as role models and mentors. According to bell hooks (1984), “sexism and sexist oppression, they can only be successfully eradicated if men are compelled to assume responsibility for transforming their consciousness and the consciousness of society as a whole” (p. 81). Our article applies the self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) to encourage men to do so. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) 

Three studies ( N = 1,349) examined why allyship from men (vs. women) is often more impactful in decreasing women’s concerns of negative treatment within male-dominated spaces in the United States. Women anticipated more respect from their peers after a man (vs. woman), identified as a gender equality ally. Increased respect mediated women’s lower anticipation of negative workplace treatment and higher anticipation of support (Studies 1–3). This effect was driven by the belief that an allied man holds more influence within an organization than an allied woman (Study 2). Study 2 additionally contrasted allyship to workplace friendship to determine the unique impact of gender-equality allyship compared to other forms of support from peers. In Study 3, ally influence was manipulated to assess whether an ally’s ability to communicate respect to women is contingent upon perceived influence. These results indicate that the positive impact of allyship from men is due in part to the greater perceived influence of allied men and their ability to communicate respect to women.