Same Behavior, Different Consequences: Reactions to Men���s and Women���s Altruistic Citizenship Behavior Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen New York University In 2 experimental studies, the authors hypothesized that the performance of altruistic citizenship behavior in a work setting would enhance the favorability of men���s (but not women���s) evaluations and recom- mendations, whereas the withholding of altruistic citizenship behavior would diminish the favorability of women���s (but not men���s) evaluations and recommendations. Results supported the authors��� predictions. Together with the results of a 3rd study demonstrating that work-related altruism is thought to be less optional for women than for men, these results suggest that gender-stereotypic prescriptions regarding how men and women should behave result in different evaluative reactions to the same altruistic behavior, depending on the performer���s sex. Stereotypes about women are prescriptive as well as descriptive. Not only do they specify what women are like, but they also dictate norms about how women should behave (Burgess & Borgida, 1999 Eagly & Karau, 2002 Heilman, 2001). The studies reported here examine how these gender role prescriptions can affect reac- tions to women as compared with reactions to men in work settings. Our particular focus is on altruistic citizenship behavior. Specifically, we propose that the same act of work-related altruism will prompt different evaluations and recommendations, depend- ing on the sex of the performer. Altruism has been identified as one of several dimensions of organizational citizenship behavior���behavior that involves prosocial activity in the workplace that increases the effective functioning of the organization (Organ, 1988). Organizational citizenship behaviors are not part of an individual���s formal job duties or responsibilities, and they often are perceived by those in the workplace to be both voluntary and discretionary. Al- though they are not explicitly specified in the formal job description, organizational citizenship behaviors have fre- quently been shown to favorably affect individuals��� perfor- mance evaluations and the determination of their deservingness for organizational rewards (Allen & Rush, 1998 Mackenzie, Podsakoff, & Fetter, 1991, 1993 Motowidlo & Van Scotter, 1994 Werner, 1994) and to play a significant role in decisions that impact career advancement and success (Podsakoff, Mack- enzie, Paine, & Bachrach, 2000).1 Altruism (called ���helping behavior��� by some researchers) is a central dimension of organizational citizenship behavior (e.g., Organ, 1988 Podsakoff et al., 2000). It involves assisting others with organizationally relevant tasks���going the ���extra mile��� to help others out with a work-related problem. Being a helper is central to female gender stereotype prescriptions, which dictate that women be nurturing and socially oriented (communal) rather than competitive and achievement oriented (agentic) (Eagly & Mladinic, 1989 Eagly & Steffen, 1984 Heilman, 2001). Behav- iors deemed appropriate for women therefore involve supportive- ness and being concerned about the well-being of others. These prescribed behaviors not only provide a blueprint for action for women themselves but also create expectations on the part of others about how women are likely to behave. They therefore are likely to lead to the expectation that, when given the opportunity, women will engage in altruistic citizenship behav- ior, not avoid it. Violations of normative role prescriptions tend to be penalized (Cialdini & Trost, 1998), and violations of women���s gender role prescriptions in work settings are no exception. There is evidence that women are evaluated unfavorably as compared with men when they engage in stereotypic male behaviors such as using autocratic or directive leadership styles (Butler & Geis, 1990 Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992), presenting themselves in a self-promoting manner (Rudman, 1998), using a task-oriented nonverbal style (Carli, LaFleur, & Loeber, 1995), or simply being successful managers (Eagly & Johnson, 1990 Heilman, Wallen, Fuchs, & Tamkins, 2004 Heilman, Block & Martell, 1995 Heilman, Block, Martell, & Simon, 1989). But women behave inconsistently with stereotype-based gender role prescriptions not only when they behave ���like men��� but also when they fail to behave ���as women should.��� Therefore, not engaging in altruistic citizenship behavior, because it violates the female prescription to be communal, is also likely to prove costly for women in work settings. 1 The fact that organizational rewards have been found to be associated with citizenship behavior has raised questions about whether it truly is discretionary and should be classified as extrarole behavior or contextual performance (Borman & Motowidlo, 1993 Organ, 1997 Van Dyne, Cum- mings, & McLean Parks, 1995). However, the classification of citizenship behavior is peripheral to our concern. Rather, the ideas presented here are concerned with perceptions of citizenship behavior as discretionary be- cause they are not part of the formal job expectations. Madeline E. Heilman and Julie J. Chen, Department of Psychology, New York University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Madeline E. Heilman, Department of Psychology, New York University, 6 Washington Place, Room 576, New York, NY 10003. E-mail: madeline.heilman@nyu.edu Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association 2005, Vol. 90, No. 3, 431���441 0021-9010/05/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.431 431

Moreover, even if women behave consistently with female role prescriptions and engage in altruistic citizenship behaviors, they are not likely to induce reactions equally favorable as reactions to men who engage in the very same behaviors. Because such prescription-consistent actions are routinely ex- pected for women, they are not apt to be regarded as particu- larly noteworthy thus, when they occur, they are likely to be disregarded or ignored. Consequently, work behavior that is applauded in men may not result in equivalent recognition or acclaim for women when the behavior is, as the case with altruistic citizenship behavior, one that is directly specified by the female gender role prescription. In such instances, women are unlikely to be as highly regarded or as highly rewarded as men who engage in the identical behavior. According to our reasoning, then, women who fail to perform altruistic citizenship behaviors when the opportunity arises are likely to provoke strong negative reactions���they are behaving contrary to the specifications of the female role prescription. This stands in contrast to men whose similar failure to act altruistically is unlikely to be of great consequence because being helpful is not normatively required of them. Furthermore, women who do per- form altruistic citizenship behaviors are unlikely to be noticed, or, if they are, their actions may not be considered to be anything special, whereas men���s altruistic behavior is more likely to stand out and appear to be exceptional. So, women are likely to benefit less than men from performing altruistic citizenship behaviors and are likely to be penalized more than men for their failure to act altruistically. In the following study, undergraduate students were asked to review the performance profile of an employee and then eval- uate his or her performance and make recommendations about organizational rewards. The employees were either men or women and were depicted as having chosen to engage or having chosen not to engage in altruistic citizenship behavior when confronted with the opportunity to do so. Also included for purposes of control was a condition in which no information about altruistic citizenship behavior was presented. We ex- pected that women, who are expected to fulfill their prescribed role behaviors by being helpful, would not benefit when they engaged in altruistic citizenship behavior but would be harshly treated when they did not. In contrast, we expected that men, who are not normatively required to be helpful, would benefit when they engaged in altruistic citizenship behavior but would suffer no penalty when they did not. We therefore hypothesized the following: Hypothesis 1. Engaging in altruistic citizenship behavior will enhance men���s performance evaluations and reward recom- mendations but will not affect those of women. Hypothesis 2. Withholding altruistic citizenship behavior will be detrimental to women���s performance evaluations and reward recommendations but will not affect those of men. In addition, we collected participants��� perceptions of the em- ployee���s competence and interpersonal civility to control for their possible effects on our dependent variable measures. Study 1 Method Participants One hundred thirty-five male and female undergraduate students en- rolled in introductory psychology courses at a large northeastern university participated in this study in exchange for course credit. Their mean age was 19.9 years (SD 3.08). Two thirds of the participants were women. Design The study was a 2 3 factorial between-subjects design, with the independent variables being the performance of altruistic citizenship be- havior (performed, not performed, and no information about performance) and sex of the target being rated. Participants were randomly assigned to the six conditions, with 22 participants in each of the male target conditions and 23 participants in each of the female target conditions. Procedure Each participant was given a folder of research materials, the first page of which was a cover sheet explaining the purpose of the study. The study was said to be focused on performance evaluation methods and, in partic- ular, was concerned with examining the effectiveness of 360-degree feed- back procedures. We provided some background information about the 360�� feedback process and briefly described its purpose and advantages as well as the procedures used to implement it. Participants were told that during the research session, they would be reviewing an employee���s performance feedback materials and that the materials they would see had been completed by either the employee���s supervisor, coworker, or subor- dinate. Unknown to them, all participants received performance feedback materials that had been completed by the employee���s coworker. We se- lected the coworker to be the information source because we thought it most plausible that the coworker would have had experiences relevant to altruistic behavior and would choose to share them. The next page, labeled Employee Information Form, contained back- ground information about the employee���s work history with the company. This information included the employee���s work department name (Pur- chasing) and job title (Level III, Administrator). This job was chosen to be gender neutral���not particularly male or female in gender type, and pre- testing verified that this was the case. Also included was the employee���s starting date, indicating length of tenure in the company (5 years) and tenure in the current position (4 years). Also included was a photograph of the employee���s four-person work group, consisting of two women and two men of approximately the same age (late 20s), dressed in professional attire a red arrow designated the employee who was to be rated. Participants were then presented with a feedback rating form, ostensibly completed by the employee���s coworker. The first section of the form contained a list of various work skills and attributes, on which the em- ployee was rated for proficiency on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 ( poor) to 5 (excellent). These skills and attributes included planning and organiz- ing, follow through, dependability, efficiency, accuracy, accepting of re- sponsibility, versatility, capacity to work, and emotional stability. The employee was rated ���good��� on seven of the scales and ���excellent��� on the two others. The second section of the feedback form contained the co- worker���s open-ended report of episodes that ���characterize the employee���s typical work behavior.��� The final portion of the materials was a questionnaire that asked partic- ipants to evaluate the employee���s job performance and make recommen- dations for organizational rewards. It also asked for attribute ratings of the employee. After completing the questionnaire, participants were fully debriefed and the purpose of the study explained. 432 HEILMAN AND CHEN