Publications Database
Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!
The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:
- Faculty Member’s Name;
- Area of Expertise;
- Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
- Journal Name; and
- Date Range.
At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.
If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Search Results
Nhu Nguyen, Ivona Hideg, Yuval Engel, and Frédéric Godart (2024). "Benevolent Sexism and the Gender Gap in Startup Evaluation", Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 48(2), 506-546.
Abstract
Women-led startups are evaluated less favorably than men-led startups, but the reasons for this require further investigation. Drawing on ambivalent sexism theory, we posit that benevolent sexism undermines gender equity in startup evaluation. We initially expected benevolent sexism to be negatively related to evaluations of women-led startups. Surprisingly, we found that benevolent sexism is unrelated to evaluations of women-led startups but is positively related to those of men-led startups—a finding that was replicated in two additional studies. Our work demonstrates benevolent sexism as an advantaging mechanism of inequity in entrepreneurship that boosts men’s outcomes without directly harming women’s outcomes.Cheng, P., Kim, K.Y. and Shen, W. (2020). "Personal Endorsement of Ambivalent Sexism and Career Success: An Investigation of Differential Mechanisms", Journal of Business & Psychology, 35, 783-798.
Abstract
Prior research on ambivalent sexism indicates that hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes together uphold the gender hierarchy or status quo. However, research has generally focused on the ambivalent sexism of others. The current study takes an alternative and complementary approach by examining whether, why, and for whom personal endorsement of hostile and sexist attitudes is related to career success. Integrating ambivalent sexism theory, resource management theories of career success, and social role theory, we theorize differential mechanisms via which hostile and benevolent sexism are divergently related to objective and subjective career success. Results revealed that gender had direct relationships with hostile sexism, whereas gender tended to also moderate relationships between benevolent sexism and choices and experiences at the work-family interface that could be prescribed by traditional gender roles (i.e., length of career interruptions and work-to-family conflict). Additionally, actions and choices that were more visible to others generally mediated relationships between sexist attitudes and objective career success (i.e., hostile sexism → seeking career advice from men → pay), whereas internal experiences and cognitions tended to mediate relationships between sexist attitudes and subjective career success (i.e., benevolent sexism → work-family conflict → satisfaction, but only for women). Overall, these results highlight the importance of studying whether, the process through which, personal endorsement of sexism influences work experiences, choices, and outcomes.Hideg, I. and Shen, W. (2019). "Why Still so Few? A Theoretical Model of the Role of Benevolent Sexism and Career Support in the Continued Underrepresentation of Women in Leadership Positions", Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 26, 287-303.