In science communication, the gender of an author as well as the gendered stereotypes assigned to their area of research impact the perceived scientific quality of their work: male scientists and “masculine” topics are frequently perceived as demonstrating higher scientific quality.

Women are more likely than men to have strongly internalized moral identities, leading to more ethical negotiation practices—but the situation can suppress women’s ethical strength.

Women may be encouraged to run for office when structural rather than personal challenges are emphasized to explain the gender gap, but effects vary by race and ethnicity.

Résumés signaling high socioeconomic class status made male applicants, but not female applicants, more likely to be selected for a job interview at elite law firms.

Women and men are equally likely to volunteer as group representatives when chosen randomly, but women are less likely than men to run in an election.

Despite being an underrepresented group in STEM professions, Black women are relatively less likely than white women to associate STEM with masculinity, and more likely to begin STEM studies in college.

Hands-on learning techniques are more effective in teaching about sexism, reducing information rejection and increasing feelings of self-empowerment.

Showing the number of current applicants for a job posting increases the likelihood that job seekers—especially women—will apply.

When women are confronted with negative stereotypes about women and math ability, they underperform on math examinations, and activity in brain regions associated with depression and social rejection is seen.

In a study of Malawi farmers, women learn an agricultural technique as easily as men, but are unsuccessful in spreading this knowledge to others.