Joan McKay Versus John McKay: Do Gender Stereotypes Bias Evaluations?

Janet Swim, Eugene Borgida, Geoffrey M Maruyama, David G. Myers

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

225 Scopus citations


Examines research using a classic, influential experiment conducted by Goldberg (1968), showing that women were likely to rate male authors (e.g., John T. McKay) more favorably than female authors (e.g., Joan T. McKay) of identical articles. Although replications of this study have been inconclusive, Goldberg's research is still frequently cited as demonstrating an evaluative bias against women. A quantitative meta-analysis of research using Goldberg's experimental paradigm shows that the average difference between ratings of men and women is negligible. Furthermore, although the effect sizes are not homogeneous, the difference remains negligible when other factors such as sex of subject or year of publication are taken into consideration. Several explanations for the heterogeneity of effect sizes and the inconsistency of findings are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)409-429
Number of pages21
JournalPsychological Bulletin
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 1989


Dive into the research topics of 'Joan McKay Versus John McKay: Do Gender Stereotypes Bias Evaluations?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this