A threat in the network: STEM women in less powerful network positions avoid integrating stereotypically feminine peers.

(Only STEM women descriptively preferred integrating the STEM-stereotypic target, b = −0.10, whereas STEM men and non-STEM women had the opposite preference, respective b s = 0.10 and 0.11, but these simple effects were nonsignificant, p s > .18.) Replicating the interaction pattern for friendship formation in the pilot experiment, the hypothesized STEM Female Contrast × Target Stereotypicality × Brokerage interaction was marginally significant, χ 2 (1) = 2.83, p = .093 (see Table 5 ).

also in 26,082 other papers

The two-way STEM Female Contrast × Target Stereotypicality interaction attained marginal significance, χ 2 (1) = 2.72, p = .099, indicating a marginally stronger STEM-stereotypic target preference among STEM women than among the other groups, as hypothesized (see Figure 2a ).

also in 5,069 other papers

(For friendship integration, it was trending.) For network brokerage, the higher order interactions trended in the predicted direction but failed to attain significance, except among participants only moderately identified with their academic majors.

also in 59 other papers