Micro-inequity

Last updated

A Micro-inequity is a small, often overlooked act of exclusion or bias that could convey a lack of respect, recognition, or fairness towards marginalized individuals. These acts can manifest in various ways, such as consistently interrupting or dismissing the contributions of a particular group during meetings or discussions. The theory of micro-inequity helps elucidate how individuals may experience being overlooked, ignored, or harmed based on characteristics like race, gender, or other perceived attributes of disadvantage, including political views and marital status. [1] [2] This falls within the broader marginalizing micro-level dynamics that refer to subtle, often unnoticed mechanisms within a society that contribute to the exclusion, disempowerment, or disadvantage of certain individuals or groups. These dynamics operate at a granular level, perpetuating inequalities and disparities in resource distribution, access to opportunities, and overall participation in social, economic, and political spheres. [3] Micro-inequities, micro-affirmations, and micro-advantages are often executed using coded language or subtle non-verbal cues, formally in written communications or informally in conversations, known as micro-messaging. [4] The term originated in 1973. [5] [6] [7] [8]

Contents

Overview

Maryville University defines micro-inequities [9] as subtle messages that devalue, discourage, and impair workplace performance. [10] These messages are conveyed through facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice, word choices, nuance, and syntax that are relayed both consciously and unconsciously. Repeated sending or receiving of micro-inequities can erode personal and professional relationships. The Star-Ledger article, "Micro-messages Matter" by Steve Adubato says that, "only the most astute and aware communicators recognize how [micro-messages] are received and perceived." [11]

These messages can reveal more about the true nature of a relationship than words alone. The messages function as the core of how unconscious bias is communicated and how workplace exclusion is experienced. In the Profiles in Diversity Journal article "The DNA of Culture Change," Joyce Tucker writes, "Organizations have done a great job at controlling the big, easily-seen offensive behaviors but have been somewhat blind to what is rarely observed. Organizations have done great work at controlling the few elephants while being overrun by a phalanx of ants. Listening with your arms folded, losing eye contact with the person you're speaking with, or even the way you move your lips to shape a smile—in any given conversation, we may send hundreds of messages, often without even saying a word. Just as television or radio waves surround us, yet we never see them, these micro-messages are just as pervasive and nearly as difficult to discern." [12]

Early studies

Mary Rowe of MIT, coined the terms micro-inequities and micro-affirmations in 1973, building upon previous research on micro-aggression by Chester Pierce, specifically around racial hostility. Originally, Rowe referred to micro-inequities as the "Saturn's Ring Phenomenon" [13] [14] [15] because the planet’s rings protect and insulate it from the harshness of the world outside, much like the workplace culture created by micro-affirmations. Some of these papers were published in whole or in part in 1974. After that, a relatively complete version came out in 1990. [16] Rowe published a longer article, "Micro-affirmations and Micro-inequities," in the Journal of the International Ombudsman Association, [17] which includes more of her hypotheses about the importance of micro-affirmations. Earlier works in the same genre include that of Jean-Paul Sartre, who wrote about small acts of anti-Semitism, and Chester Pierce, who wrote about micro-aggressions as acts of racism and "childish" acts against children.

Mary Rowe's original research studied the impact micro-messages have on the academic community and relationships in general in the United States and worldwide. The first broad introduction of micro-inequities in the corporate workplace was initiated in 2002 by Insight Education Systems. It established the link between micro-messaging and corporate diversity and inclusion initiatives.

Definition

In the original articles on this subject in the 1970s (see references below), Mary Rowe defined micro-inequities as "apparently small events which are often ephemeral and hard-to-prove, events which are covert, often unintentional, frequently unrecognized by the perpetrator, which occur wherever people are perceived to be different."[ citation needed ] She wrote about homophobia, reactions to perceived disabilities, reactions to physical appearance, reverse discrimination against white and Black males in traditionally female environments, and various religious slights. She collected instances of micro-inequities anywhere at work or in communities—anywhere in the world—that people are perceived to be "different."

These differences indeed reach beyond unchangeable characteristics such as race or gender. In his book, "Micro messaging: Why Great Leadership is Beyond Words" (2006 McGraw-Hill), Stephen Young describes the impact micro-inequities have on an individual's workplace performance through additional factors, such as one's political views, marital status, tenure, style, resistance to comply with status quo and other characteristics that are changeable. [2]

Young states that these drivers of unconscious bias reflect the positions people hold about others that are influenced by past experiences, forming filters that cause conclusions to be reached about a group or ethnicity through methods other than active thought or reasoning. The critical limitation of unconscious bias is that it is a concept, a state of mind, and therefore not consciously or intentionally displayed. The only way unconscious biases are manifested is through the subtle messages individuals send—typically, micro-inequities affect the performance of others. [18]

Micro-affirmations and micro-advantages

A micro-affirmation, in Rowe's writing, is the reverse phenomenon. Micro-affirmations are subtle or small acknowledgments of a person's value and accomplishments. They may take the shape of public recognition of the person, "opening a door," referring positively to a person's work, commending someone on the spot, or making a happy introduction. "Small" affirmations form the basis of successful mentoring, effective networks, successful colleague-ships, and most caring relationships. They may lead to greater self-esteem and improved performance. In 2015, Rowe collected her hypotheses about the potential power of micro-affirmations: [19]

  1. "Blocking unconscious bias: We could try to practice—all the time—affirming the achievements of others. If we always look for excellence in the work of others and are universally respectful, may we be able to block our own unconscious bias?
  2. Ameliorate damage: Can micro-affirmations (for example, in affinity groups and mentoring programs) make up for some of the damage caused by unconscious bias?
  3. Meeting a core emotional concern: Since research suggests that appreciation and affirmation are core concerns for all of us, may this plan help in making the workplace more productive?
  4. Evoking reciprocal affirmation: Since research suggests an impulse toward "reciprocity," may affirm behavior spread as we respond to support from others?
  5. A possible role modeling effect: Research suggests that people are sensitive to the morale and happiness of those around them and especially sensitive to the behavior of a local manager. If managers, bystanders, and others are role models for affirming behavior, will some others follow suit? Peers and bystanders are often the most important actors because they are most likely to be present where people act in a biased fashion.
  6. Rectifying our own unconscious bias: Research suggests that behavior follows attitudes. Attitudes also can be changed by behavior. If we consciously improve our behavior, may we lessen our unconscious bias?"

In 2021, Mary Rowe wrote of the influence of micro-affirmations in building a sense of "belonging." [20]

There is a difference between "inequality" and "inequity." Inequality implies there is some comparison being made. For example, if a boss doesn't listen attentively to an employee, that in and of itself is not a micro-inequality. However, if the boss listens attentively to all of an employee's coworkers but not that employee, that might be a micro-inequality.

Inequity, by contrast, is simply something that may be perceived as unfair or unjust under the circumstances. Thus, a micro-inequity may occur with only one person present if that person is treated unfairly or unjustly. Similarly, a micro-affirmation may refer to "only one" person and does not imply any sense of advantage over others but rather provides support, inspiration, and encouragement to the affirmed individual.

An alternate perspective to Mary Rowe's "reverse phenomenon" of micro-affirmations theory is Stephen Young's introduction of a third layer, micro-advantages. [21] Micro-advantages are subtle, often unconscious, messages that motivate, inspire, and enhance workplace performance. Like micro-inequities, they are conveyed through facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice, choice of words, nuance and syntax. Applied effectively, micro-advantages can unlock employee potential, enabling engagement, creativity, loyalty, and performance. Micro-advantages are central to effective leadership. An affirmation is a statement asserting existence or truth in a way that helps the person affirmed; a micro-advantage is a subtle message that motivates and inspires performance in the workplace or classroom.

In culture

Micro-inequities may concern race, religion, color, disability, sexual identity, social class, and national origin. Some are embodied in language that links certain derogatory stereotypes with a particular race. Examples of such micro-inequities would be the terms "an Indian giver" and "to gyp," or the phrase "to Jew down." Other examples include the casual use of the term "she" while referring to individuals in occupations that have been predominantly women, such as teachers, nurses, and secretaries, and the disrespect sometimes exhibited toward fathers as full-time homemakers.

Elimination of micro-inequities is a current focus of some universities, businesses, and government agencies as a key diversity strategy. According to some experts, micro-inequities can slowly and methodically erode a person's motivation and sense of worth. This may result in absenteeism, poor employee retention, and loss of productivity. In the article "Sizing Up What's Being Said" in The Sacramento Bee , nine techniques are outlined that help minimize the negative effect of micro-inequities. [22]

Modern media is also responsible for the perpetuation of micro-inequities. People of color have been portrayed negatively; eminent people of color are poorly represented in Western media. Examples would include the fallacious belief that African Americans are the majority of those on welfare in the US. Many Native Americans are sensitive to the idea that "Columbus discovered" their land. Feagin and Benokraitis note that the mass media has portrayed women negatively in many respects; for example, women are portrayed as sexual objects in many music videos.

In Julie Rowe's Time Magazine article "Why Your Boss May Be Sweating the Small Stuff," she outlines workplace micro-inequity applications and how they influence performance. [23] Rowe states, "It used to be that [micro-inequities were] tone-deaf moments used to buttress discrimination claims. Now they are becoming the basis for [validating] those claims."

Micro-messaging has varying impacts in academic and corporate settings. In academia, students predominantly receive knowledge from educators. Conversely, the corporate environment emphasizes collaboration, with leaders drawing on the expertise of their team members. Raising the knowledge of micro-messaging in the corporate sector can "make even hardened executives recognize themselves, or at the very least, their superiors" as senders of micro-inequities, according to Young. [23] Since micro-inequities represent each person's status quo of behavior, it normally requires experiential examples on the receiving side to understand their impact on altering performance. Stephen Young and Mary Rowe agree, "A good way to deal with micro-inequities is to bring them to the forefront through discussion."

Further research and controversy

Mary Rowe defined micro-inequities as "small events that may be ephemeral and hard to prove" and stated that "it is not easy to measure the effects of gender micro-inequities because effects of unfair behavior may differ by context." [24] There is a growing body of scholarly research on unconscious bias. Much of the modern approach has used an Implicit Association Test rather than Questionnaires or interviews. [25] However, many scholars have published articles and analyses doubting the efficacy and validity of this research. [25]

A book on the same subject was written pseudonymously in the late 1970s by Mary Howell, MD, of Harvard Medical School. Under the name of "Margaret Campbell, MD," Howell wrote, "Why Would a 'Girl' Want to go into Medicine?"

Wesley E. Profit wrote his Harvard doctoral thesis on the micro-inequities of racism. Ellen Spertus, an MIT student at the time, did a small study, "Why Are There So Few Female Computer Scientists?", MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Technical Report 1315, August 1991. This is one of many such studies from various departments at MIT.

Frances K. Conley, then of Stanford Medical School, published "Walking Out on the Boys" in 1998, which deals with her experience as a woman neurosurgeon and sexism in the medical profession. Stephen Young uses the concept of "micro-advantages," rather than "micro-affirmations." He published "Micro-Messaging" in 2006 (McGraw-Hill). Scholarly works include "Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women" by Virginia Valian, MIT Press, 1999, and the article "What Knowers Know Well: Women, Work, and the Academy," Alison Wylie, University of Washington, 2009.

Recently, a great deal of work has been done by various consultants, experts doing research in the social sciences and neuroscience, and leaders in the field of diversity. After earning a communications degree from Emerson College, Stephen Young entered finance and eventually became senior vice president of JP Morgan Chase, managing the firm's global diversity strategy. Inspired by MIT Professor Mary P. Rowe's decades of research into what she called "micro-inequities" in colleges and the workplace, he became a consultant and developed seminars to sensitize executives to the full range of what he calls "micro-messages." Young's company, Insight Education Systems, founded in 2002, has helped implement his program at Starbucks, Raytheon, Cisco, IBM, Merck, and other Fortune 500 corporations. [26]

Related Research Articles

Bias is a disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing, usually in a way that is closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair. Biases can be innate or learned. People may develop biases for or against an individual, a group, or a belief. In science and engineering, a bias is a systematic error. Statistical bias results from an unfair sampling of a population, or from an estimation process that does not give accurate results on average.

Systemic bias is the inherent tendency of a process to support particular outcomes. The term generally refers to human systems such as institutions. Systemic bias is related to and overlaps conceptually with institutional bias and structural bias, and the terms are often used interchangeably.

Equity theory focuses on determining whether the distribution of resources is fair. Equity is measured by comparing the ratio of contributions and benefits for each person. Considered one of the justice theories, equity theory was first developed in the 1960s by J. Stacy Adams, a workplace and behavioral psychologist, who asserted that employees seek to maintain equity between the inputs that they bring to a job and the outcomes that they receive from it against the perceived inputs and outcomes of others. According to Equity Theory, in order to maximize individuals' rewards, we tend to create systems where resources can be fairly divided amongst members of a group. Inequalities in relationships will cause those within it to be unhappy to a degree proportional to the amount of inequality. The belief is that people value fair treatment which causes them to be motivated to keep the fairness maintained within the relationships of their co-workers and the organization. The structure of equity in the workplace is based on the ratio of inputs to outcomes. Inputs are the contributions made by the employee for the organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glass ceiling</span> Obstacles keeping a population from achievement

A glass ceiling is a metaphor usually applied to people of marginalized genders, used to represent an invisible barrier that prevents an oppressed demographic from rising beyond a certain level in a hierarchy. No matter how invisible the glass ceiling is expressed, it is actually an obstacle difficult to overcome. The metaphor was first used by feminists in reference to barriers in the careers of high-achieving women. It was coined by Marilyn Loden during a speech in 1978.

The halo effect is the tendency for positive impressions of a person, company, country, brand, or product in one area to positively or negatively influence one's opinion or feelings in other areas. Halo effect is "the name given to the phenomenon whereby evaluators tend to be influenced by their previous judgments of performance or personality." The halo effect is a cognitive bias which can possibly prevent someone from accepting a person, a product or a brand based on the idea of an unfounded belief on what is good or bad.

The bias blind spot is the cognitive bias of recognizing the impact of biases on the judgment of others, while failing to see the impact of biases on one's own judgment. The term was created by Emily Pronin, a social psychologist from Princeton University's Department of Psychology, with colleagues Daniel Lin and Lee Ross. The bias blind spot is named after the visual blind spot. Most people appear to exhibit the bias blind spot. In a sample of more than 600 residents of the United States, more than 85% believed they were less biased than the average American. Only one participant believed that they were more biased than the average American. People do vary with regard to the extent to which they exhibit the bias blind spot. This phenomenon has been successfully replicated and it appears that in general, stronger personal free will beliefs are associated with bias blind spot. It appears to be a stable individual difference that is measurable.

Emotional contagion is a form of social contagion that involves the spontaneous spread of emotions and related behaviors. Such emotional convergence can happen from one person to another, or in a larger group. Emotions can be shared across individuals in many ways, both implicitly or explicitly. For instance, conscious reasoning, analysis, and imagination have all been found to contribute to the phenomenon. The behaviour has been found in humans, other primates, dogs, and chickens.

Microaggression is a term used for commonplace verbal, behavioral or environmental slights, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative attitudes toward stigmatized or culturally marginalized groups. The term was coined by Harvard University psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce in 1970 to describe insults and dismissals which he regularly witnessed non-black Americans inflicting on African Americans. By the early 21st century, use of the term was applied to the casual disparagement of any socially marginalized group, including LGBT people, poor people, and disabled people. Psychologist Derald Wing Sue defines microaggressions as "brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to certain individuals because of their group membership". The persons making the comments may be otherwise well-intentioned and unaware of the potential impact of their words.

Occupational inequality is the unequal treatment of people based on gender, sexuality, age, disability, socioeconomic status, religion, height, weight, accent, or ethnicity in the workplace. When researchers study trends in occupational inequality they usually focus on distribution or allocation pattern of groups across occupations, for example, the distribution of men compared to women in a certain occupation. Secondly, they focus on the link between occupation and income, for example, comparing the income of whites with blacks in the same occupation.

Aversive racism is a theory proposed by Samuel L. Gaertner & John F. Dovidio (1986), according to which negative evaluations of racial/ethnic minorities are realized by a persistent avoidance of interaction with other racial and ethnic groups. As opposed to traditional, overt racism, which is characterized by overt hatred for and discrimination against racial/ethnic minorities, aversive racism is characterized by more complex, ambivalent expressions and attitudes nonetheless with prejudicial views towards other races. Aversive racism arises from unconscious personal beliefs taught during childhood. Subtle racist behaviors are usually targeted towards African Americans. Workplace discrimination is one of the best examples of aversive racism. Biased beliefs on how minorities act and think affect how individuals interact with minority members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Elisabeth Kelan</span> British academic

Elisabeth Kelan is a Professor of Leadership and Organisation at Essex Business School and Director of the Cranfield International Centre for Women Leaders at Cranfield School of Management. Prior to that she was an Associate Professor in the Department of Management at King's College London and Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Women in Business at London Business School, founded by Laura D’Andrea Tyson. She also worked at the Gender Institute of the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) where she received her PhD.

David R. Hekman is an associate professor of organizational leadership and information analytics at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Hekman's research focuses on improving organizational health, including the demographic pay gap and the demographic power gap. His work has been written about in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Chicago Tribune, The Atlantic, and Forbes.

Queen bee syndrome is a phenomenon first defined by C. Tavris, G.L. Staines, and T.E. Jayaratne in 1973. “Queen bee” is a derogatory term applied to women who have achieved success in traditionally male-dominated fields. These women often take on “masculine” traits and distance themselves from other women in the workplace in order to succeed. They may also view or treat subordinates more critically if they are female, and refuse to help other women rise up the ranks as a form of self-preservation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender bias on Wikipedia</span> Gender gap problem in Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects

Gender bias on Wikipedia is a term used to describe various sex-related facts about Wikipedia: its contributors are mostly male, relatively few biographies on Wikipedia are about women, and topics primarily of interest to women are less well-covered.

Sexism in the technology industry is overt, subtle, or covert occupational sexism which makes the technology industry less friendly, less accessible, and less profitable for women. While the participation of women in the tech industry varies by region, it is generally around 4% to 20% depending on the measure used. Possible causes that have been studied by researchers include gender stereotypes, investment influenced by those beliefs, a male-dominated environment, a lack of awareness about sexual harassment, and the culture of the industry itself. Margaret O'Mara, a professor of history at the University of Washington, in 2019 concluded that Silicon Valley is uniquely influential locale that is shaping our world. But she points to problematic failures regarding diversity. Male oligopolies of high-tech power have recreated traditional environments that repress the talents and ambitions of women, people of color, and other minorities to the benefit of whites and Asian males.

Second-generation gender bias refers to practices that may appear neutral or non-sexist, in that they apply to everyone, but which discriminate against a gender because they reflect the values of the gender who created or developed the setting, usually a workplace. It is contrasted with first-generation bias, which is deliberate, usually involving intentional exclusion.

Resistance to diversity efforts in organizations is a well-established and ubiquitous phenomenon that may be characterized by thoughts, feelings, or behaviors that undermine the success of diversity-related organizational change initiatives to recruit or retain diverse personnel. The use of such initiatives may be referred to as diversity management. Scholars note the presence of resistance to diversity before and after the civil rights movement; as pressures for diversity and social change increased in the 1960s, dominant group members faced workplace concerns over displacement by minorities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arghavan Salles</span> American surgeon (born 1980)

Arghavan Salles is an Iranian American bariatric surgeon. Salles is a Director of the American Medical Women's Association, a Special Advisor for DEI Programs in the Department of Medicine at Stanford University School of Medicine and a Senior Research Scholar at the Clayman Institute for Gender Research. Salles' research focuses on gender equity, well-being, and the challenges women face in the workplace. Salles works as an advocate for equity and inclusion and as an activist against sexual harassment. Salles is an international speaker who worked on the front lines and supported health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic through social media.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zillennials</span> Individuals born during the Millennial/Generation Z cusp

Zillennials is the demographic cohort on the cusp of the millennial and Generation Z cohorts. Their adjacency between the two generations and limited age grade has led to their characterization as a "micro-generation." They are generally the children of the members of Generation Jones and Generation X. Estimates of the U.S. population in this cohort range from 30 million to 48 million.

Mary P. Rowe is an adjunct professor of Negotiation and Conflict Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management, where she specializes in the areas of conflict resolution, negotiation and risk management.

References

  1. ↑ Sandler, Bernice. "The Campus Climate Revisited: Chilly for Women Faculty, Administrators, and Graduate Students." Association of American Colleges. 1986.
  2. 1 2 Goforth, Candace (July 5, 2004). "Micromessages Macro-Misunderstandings" (PDF). Akron Beacon Journal. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 24, 2015.
  3. ↑ Ridgeway, Cecilia L. (2014). "Why Status Matters for Inequality". American Sociological Review. 79 (1): 1+. doi:10.1177/0003122413515997. ISSN   0003-1224.
  4. ↑ Young, Stephen (March–April 2003). MicroMessaging: Why Great Leadership is Beyond Words. McGraw-Hill. pp. 2–11. ISBN   9780071467575. Archived from the original on 2015-11-18. Retrieved 2014-10-05.
  5. ↑ "The Moral Status of Micro-Inequities: In Favor of Institutional Solutions". Oxford University Press . Retrieved 2023-10-05.
  6. ↑ "Micro-Inequities: 40 Years Later | Psychology Today". Psychology Today . Retrieved 2023-10-05.
  7. ↑ "Micro-inequities (including Micro-aggressions) and Micro-affirmations". Massachusetts Institute of Technology . Retrieved 2023-10-05.
  8. ↑ Rowe, Mary (2008). "Micro-affirmations & Micro-inequities". Journal of the International Ombudsman AssociationJournal of the International Ombudsman Association. 1: 45–48.
  9. ↑ Castro-Garcia, Yaritzia; Celaj, Rhodiana. "Micro-Inequities 101". Published on 2012-12-5. Retrieved 2023-09-14.
  10. ↑ Hinton, Eric L.; Young, Stephen. "When Small Slights Lead to Huge Problems in the Workplace" (PDF). www.careerpioneernetwork.org/. DiversityInc. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-10-06. Retrieved 2014-10-05.
  11. ↑ Adubato, Steve. ""Micro-messages" Matter". www.democracyworksnj.com/. The Star Ledger. Archived from the original on 8 October 2014. Retrieved 17 April 2005.
  12. ↑ Tucker, Joyce. "Tucker, Joyce, "The DNA of Culture Change"" (PDF). No. January/February 2004. Profiles in Diversity Journal. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-09-24.
  13. ↑ Rowe, Mary (1974). "The Progress of Women in Educational Institutions: The Saturn's Rings Phenomenon". Graduate and Professional Education of Women. AAUW Conference. Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women. pp. 1–9.
  14. ↑ Rowe, Mary (1975). "The Saturn's Rings Phenomenon". Harvard Medical Alumni Bulletin. 50 (1): 14–18.
  15. ↑ Rowe, Mary (1977). "The Saturns Rings Phenomenon: Micro-Inequities and Unequal Opportunity in the American Economy". Proceedings of the NSF Conference on Women's Leadership and Authority. Santa Cruz, CA. pp. 55–72.
  16. ↑ Rowe, Mary (1990). "Barriers to Equality: The Power of Subtle Discrimination to Maintain Unequal Opportunity". Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 3 (2): 153–163. doi:10.1007/BF01388340. S2CID   145494787.
  17. ↑ "Micro-affirmations and Micro-inequities" (PDF). Journal of the International Ombudsman Association. 1 (1). March 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-09-19. Retrieved 2014-06-21.
  18. ↑ Stephen, Young. "What Is Unconscious Bias And How Is It Connected To MicroInequities?". Insight Education Systems. Archived from the original on 2015-06-14.
  19. ↑ "UNCONSCIOUS BIAS: MAY MICRO-AFFIRMATIONS PROVIDE ONE ANSWER?". MIT Institute for Work and Employment Research. February 22, 2015. Archived from the original on October 30, 2019. Retrieved April 15, 2016.
  20. ↑ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2022-11-05. Retrieved 2022-11-05.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  21. ↑ Funderburg, Lise; Young, Stephen. "The Little Chill" (PDF). hru.gov. O The Oprah Magazine, O's Guide to Life. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2014-10-06. Retrieved 2014-10-05.
  22. ↑ Osterman, Rachel (August 1, 2005). "Sizing up what's being said". The Sacramento Bee. Archived from the original on October 11, 2014.
  23. 1 2 Rawe, Julie. "Why Your Boss May Be Sweating the Small Stuff". No. March 2006. Time Magazine. Archived from the original on 2014-10-27. Retrieved 2014-10-07.
  24. ↑ "The SAGE Encyclopedia of Psychology and Gender". Archived from the original on November 27, 2020.
  25. 1 2 Goldhill, Olivia (3 December 2017). "The world is relying on a flawed psychological test to fight racism". Quartz. Archived from the original on 11 July 2020. Retrieved 13 July 2020.
  26. ↑ Averbuch, Gloria (December 20, 2007). "Sweat the Small Stuff". New Jersey Monthly. Archived from the original on December 9, 2014. Retrieved October 7, 2014.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.