Gender Norms in the Marketplace
(A2026-133129)

AUTHORS

Matilde Lucheschi, University of Sussex; Andrea Weihrauch, University of Amsterdam; Aybike Mutluoglu, SUNY Plattsburgh, United States; Carlos Eduardo Caldas de Souza, BI Norwegian Business School

ABSTRACT

This special session advances our understanding of how modern gender stereotypes and norms continue to shape consumer behavior in subtle yet powerful ways. Across four complementary papers, the session demonstrates that gendered assumptions permeate domains as diverse as AI-powered service interactions, livestreaming monetization systems, the psychology of money, and political ideology. 1. Industry-Gender Stereotypes Spillover to AI-Service Agents (Danit Ein-Gar, Liat Levontin, & Matilde Lucheschi). AI-powered assistants are becoming central to customer interaction, but as they grow more humanlike, they also inherit human biases. Four studies, spanning six industries, show that consumers extend industry gender stereotypes to AI agents: assistants in masculine industries are perceived as male and those in feminine industries as female. This stereotyping is significantly stronger among Boomers than Gen Z. The findings show that gendered industry beliefs spill over to non-human agents, even without explicit gender cues. 2. When Money Talks: How Monetization Fuels Sexist Behavior on Livestreaming Platforms (Malaurie Fauré, Andrea Weihrauch, & Sandra Laporte). Five studies show that monetization on livestreaming platforms amplifies sexist behavior toward female streamers. When monetization is made salient, viewers perceive that female streamers instrumentalize their sexualization, which increases the likelihood of sending sexist messages. Monetization also affects bystanders: sexist comments are judged as more acceptable when the streamer prioritizes money or when the sender is a paying subscriber. The findings highlight monetization as a platform feature that fuels gendered harassment. 3. Masculine Money: How Gendered Associations Alter Money’s Perceived Value (Aybike Mutluoglu & Laurence Ashworth). Five studies show that people associate money with masculinity and that this association shapes judgments about money’s value. When asked to humanize money, participants attribute more masculine characteristics to money than to other valuable resources (e.g., time). Results further indicate that linking a stimulus to money increases its perceived masculinity, and that people more quickly identify money-related stimuli when pairing them with masculinity rather than femininity. Monetary features that are incongruent with the money–masculinity association (e.g., the image on a bill) reduce money’s perceived value. 4. Gender Through Zero-Sum Lens: How Political Orientation Shapes Masculine Ideals (Carlos Eduardo Caldas, Nathan Warren, & Luk Warlop). Growing political polarization has brought masculinity to the public debate. But are conservatives and liberals really that far apart in their views on how masculine—or feminine—a man should be? Five preregistered studies show that this apparent divide conceals a more nuanced set of beliefs. Using data from the U.S., the U.K., and Brazil, conservatives view gender through a zero-sum lens, whereas liberals, while valuing masculinity nearly as much, are less averse to men having feminine traits. These ideological lenses shape judgments, and responses to gendered charitable appeals.