Women applying for a job in male-dominated fields should consider playing up their masculine qualities, according to a new paper in Psychology of Women Quarterly - because there is bias in the hiring process.

Reason number one not to listen to psychologists would be if they are telling you to assume your new employer is a bigot; that is setting the wrong tone, especially when there is no evidence for it. Some fields have more males, like engineering, but engineering also pays women more equally than politics and environmentalism, which are equal and over-represented by women, respectively, yet still don't come close to paying women fairly. Assuming a lack of women because of bias is going to cause problems.

The psychologists drew their conclusion because women who described themselves using masculine-like traits (assertive, independent, achievement oriented) were evaluated as more fitting for the job than those who emphasized female-like traits (warmth, supportiveness, nurturing).

"We found that 'manning up' seemed to be an effective strategy, because it was seen as necessary for the job," said Ann Marie Ryan, co-author and Michigan State University professor of psychology.

The upside to their finding is that at least they aren't telling women they need to conform to gender stereotypes, which other psychology papers have claimed. Instead, counter-stereotypical traits - masculine qualities for women - won't ace a backlash for not conforming to expected gender roles. When hiring for a leadership position in a male-dominated field such as engineering, Ryan said, decision makers appear to be looking for take-charge candidates, regardless of gender.

Which means they aren't biased at all. It can be difficult to figure out gender bias papers in a publication that simultaneously claims to be a feminist and scientific, peer-reviewed journal. Ryan is working with current and former doctoral students to find more ways that women face in the job hunt – and, importantly, what people might do to counter it.

There is some evidence that hiring discrimination exists for women, minorities, older workers and others - at least in fields where the skill set is not very specific - so Ryan says it's time to start focusing on why discrimination occurs and figure out what a job seeker might do to combat it. She is conducting surveys on groups ranging from ethnic minorities to military veterans to people with disabilities.

Another of her studies, which will appear in the Journal of Managerial Psychology, is titled "Strategies of job seekers to combat age-related stereotypes." Ryan and colleagues surveyed unemployed job seekers of all ages under the theory that older people perceive more discrimination and make an effort to downplay their age during interviews.

The theory proved correct. Surprisingly, though, the study found that younger workers also avoided discussing their age, apparently so they wouldn't be seen as too inexperienced. Ryan said younger job seekers are not legally protected; the law on age discrimination applies to those 40 and older.

In a study led by Michigan State University, women who emphasized masculine qualities during job interviews were evaluated as more fitting for the position. (Photo Credit: Michigan State University)

Ultimately, Ryan said, it's not the responsibility of job seekers to ensure their own equal treatment. But she hopes to help candidates find better outcomes in a culture plagued by "pervasive and persistent" discrimination. Often, that discrimination starts during the résumé-screening process, before a candidate even makes it to the job interview.

"Companies and recruiters should make sure they are not exhibiting discriminatory screening practices," Ryan said. "There's a lot of advice out there for applicants to help combat this type of bias, but our research is aimed at figuring out what kind of advice is beneficial and what kind of advice may harm you."

Prospective employees should also not assume the worst in people they expect to want to work for, of course.