Next Article in Journal
Building Muscles from Eating Insects
Previous Article in Journal
Study on the Evolutionary Characteristics of Acoustic–Magnetic–Electric Signals in the Entire Process of Coal and Gas Outburst
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 22
10.3390/su152215945
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
Retraction published on 27 February 2024, see Sustainability 2024, 16(5), 1927.
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

RETRACTED: An Exploratory Study of the Intrinsic Mechanisms of Occupational Stigma Consciousness, Career Development, and Work–Life Balance among Female Leaders

by
Qiujia Lai
1,2 and
Gukseong Lee
1,*
1
College of Business Administration, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Republic of Korea
2
School of Business and Circulation, Zhejiang Technical Institute of Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(22), 15945; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215945
Submission received: 2 October 2023 / Revised: 3 November 2023 / Accepted: 9 November 2023 / Published: 14 November 2023 / Retracted: 27 February 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study suggests a research model for investigating the negative impact of occupational stigma consciousness from the perspective of the Conservation of Resources theory. It explores the intrinsic mechanisms connecting female leaders’ stigma consciousness with their career development and work–life balance and verifies the relationships between these variables. This study conducts a quantitative analysis of data collected from a sample of 400 female leaders in Chinese enterprises and institutions. A structural equation modeling approach is used to test the proposed hypotheses. Our findings reveal that the stigma consciousness of female leadership has a significant negative impact on their career advancement and work–life balance. This negative influence is mediated by emotional exhaustion. Additionally, self-efficacy negatively moderates the relationship between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion.

1. Introduction

As professional women’s knowledge structure and social status improve, they increasingly enter management roles in traditionally male-dominated occupational fields. According to the data, the percentage of female CEOs in the S&P 500 Index had reached 5.8% by the end of April 2021, representing a 1% increase from the previous year [1]. This trend is not limited to the US; other Western countries are also experiencing a rise in female CEOs [1]. In the private sector, Chinese female entrepreneurs accounted for about 25% of all entrepreneurs in 2018 [2]. However, despite the increasing presence of women in leadership positions, perceptions continue to hinder gender equality. According to the “Survey Report on the Status of Females in the Workplace in China” released by Zhilian Recruitment in 2021 and 2022, only 5.7% of respondents believe that women possess strong leadership qualities, while 53.1% of men believe that women can occupy top positions in companies. These figures indicate that some people still label female leaders as “not capable enough” and “unable to take on leadership roles”.
Heilman [3] argues that the most significant obstacles women leaders encounter stem from prejudice and discrimination, a result of gender role stereotypes formed during the socialization process. Scholars employ metaphors such as the “Glass Ceiling” [4] and “A bed of thorns” [5] to illustrate the bias that women encounter in their progression to management, especially in top-level positions. Sexism has not vanished but has manifested in a subtler manner through various organizational practices [6]. These gender discriminations are primarily evident in performance evaluations and the promotion of female leaders [7]. Gender stereotypes impact perceptions of leadership, as it is commonly believed that effective leadership requires decisiveness and resoluteness, traits typically associated with males. However, women are often perceived as emphasizing relationships, sympathetic, and lacking courage. Consequently, there is an inherent perception that women and leadership identities are incompatible [8]. When people contemplate leadership, they often instinctively associate it with males. Some studies presume that a woman’s primary responsibility is caring for the home and children. Consequently, women aspiring to achieve career success will likely encounter criticism and rejection and be deemed nontraditional and unattractive [9]. The examples and data presented above illustrate that the stigmatization of female leadership remains prevalent in society.
Goldin C. [10], a Nobel-Prize-winning economist, found that women taking on more childcare responsibilities than men hinders their career advancement and income growth after having children. Some studies have indicated that motherhood negatively affects women’s career development, while fatherhood has no impact on men’s career development [11]. In China, traditional Confucian culture and male-dominated patriarchal beliefs still influence societal expectations regarding men and women in both life and work [12]. When work–family role conflicts arise, women tend to prioritize their family responsibilities [13]. The prevailing division of household labor often leads some women to either be absent from work or leave their jobs [14].
Much of the existing research on female leadership stigma focuses on unraveling stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination against female leaders. For instance, Schein [15] discusses the influence of gender stereotyping by management on female leaders, revealing that both male and female managers commonly hold the stereotype that “men are better managers”. Janssen et al. [16] state that female leaders face challenges throughout the workplace due to gender discrimination and unfair pay. Existing studies have primarily examined the negative impact of stigma on female leaders from the perspective of those who stigmatize them, while more in-depth research is still needed to explore the consciousness of stigma among female leaders and its effects on them. When individuals experience stigma, they may develop negative emotions, such as low self-esteem, shame, and self-depreciation [17,18]. If these negative emotions persist in the workplace, female leaders can experience emotional exhaustion, adversely affecting their career development and family life [19]. Furthermore, Chapman et al. [20] discovered that individuals experiencing stress exhibit distinct preferences and variations in their coping strategies. Thus, female leaders may display diverse coping approaches when confronted with stigma. Some may opt for positive strategies, such as resistance and seeking support, while others might choose avoidance and conformity as coping mechanisms.
When reviewing the existing research related to occupational stigma, existing studies related to occupational stigma have focused on “dirty” jobs from the research subject’s perspective, such as retail stores [21], food services [22,23], and hotel cleaners [24]. Research perspectives have included social identity [25], self-validation [18], and resource conservation [26]. From the perspective of the mechanism driving them, existing studies have explored the mechanism of occupational stigma [27], the empirical study of occupational stigma and commitment [22,28], and occupational stigma and self-esteem [29]. Although existing studies have discussed the issue of occupational stigma in various related industries, most of the studies have used qualitative research in the form of in-depth interviews to conduct exploratory research on occupational stigma, which lacks theoretical basis and empirical testing. In particular, occupational stigma consciousness and internal mechanisms are rarely studied. Furthermore, existing studies on occupational stigmatization predominantly concentrate on a limited number of individual stigmatized occupations, such as doctors, professors, and police officers. Unfortunately, there is a significant lack of empirical research exploring the specific impact of stigmatization on female leaders’ work, personal lives, and career development. This dearth of empirical examination leaves a gap in understanding how stigma uniquely affects female leaders and hampers their professional progress. Based on the identified research gap, this study focuses on female leaders as the research subjects. It integrates occupational stigma theory and COR theory to construct a comprehensive research model encompassing female leaders’ stigma consciousness. In doing so, the study aims to examine and verify the effect of stigma perception on female leaders’ career development and work–life balance while also exploring the internal mechanisms underlying this effect. This study will address three research questions: How does stigma consciousness impact the work–life balance and career development of female leaders? What underlying mechanisms link stigma consciousness to work–life balance and career development? How does a female leader mitigate the negative consequences of stigma consciousness?

2. Theory and Research Hypothesis

2.1. Conservation of Resources Theory and Research Dynamics

COR theory is derived from organizational behavior and serves as a theoretical guiding framework to reveal the processes by which people strive to maintain, protect, and build valuable resources [30,31]. The theory centers on people’s motivation to conserve existing resources and acquire new ones, providing a clear conceptual definition of resources as anything an individual perceives as contributing to achieving their basic goals [32]. Existing studies have defined the concept of “resource” in the theory more explicitly. Luthans et al. [33] and Purwanto A et al. [34] define the basis of resources as psychological capital, referring to the positive psychological state of the self-individual in the process of growth and development, which can significantly influence employees’ attitudes, behaviors, and performance at work.
The main studies of existing theories on resource preservation are organized in terms of resource preservation, acquisition, and loss. Hobfoll’s [35] study confirms that, after an employee loses resources due to their workload, the individual is strongly motivated to act to avoid further resource depletion. Cacioppo and Gardner [36] find that it is psychologically more harmful for individuals to lose resources than it is helpful for them to gain the resources that they lost. Some scholars have argued that resource loss is used to understand stress and strain and that burnout, depression, and their corresponding physiological outcomes occur when individuals lose resources [37,38].
COR theory provides a comprehensive path and analytical framework to unveil the internal mechanisms explaining the influence of stigma consciousness on female leadership. Existing research has confirmed the correlation between occupational stigma and resource conservation. For example, the identity threat and loss of self-esteem associated with occupational stigma can lead to a potential or actual loss of resources [39]. This, in turn, triggers protective behavior. Employees who encounter negative emotions and stress due to professional stigma may experience burnout and develop high turnover intentions [40]. COR theory explains individuals’ psychological motivation to conserve, acquire, and utilize resources from the perspective of resource gain and loss and can better predict and explain female leaders’ self-assessment of resources and stress burden.
However, in recent years, research on occupational stigma has been mainly based on social identity theory analysis and constructs. Most empirical studies involve qualitative research using interviews and narratives and lack quantitative research. Based on these research gaps, this study integrates the theory of occupational stigma with the theory of resource conservation, exploring the internal mechanisms linking female leaders’ occupational stigma to career development and work–life balance to provide valuable reference suggestions for human resource management.

2.2. Stigma and Occupational Stigma

The word stigma first appeared in ancient Greece, originally referring to a special mark carved on the corpses of those considered low status. Stigma research stems from Goffman’s [41] related studies on impaired identity, in which Goffman systematically defines stigma-based problems, arguing that it is a label used by society to demean and insult certain people or groups. The label is categorized into signs related to physical defects, personality defects, race, ethnicity, and religion. Hughes [42] preceded Goffman’s stigma research in presenting the conceptual “dirty work” associated with occupational stigma, i.e., the basis for the study of occupational stigma.
The most influential theory of stigmatization today comes from Link and Phelan [25], who systematically summarize the formation of individual stigma from the perspective of intergroup relations as a process combining mechanisms such as labeling, negative stereotypes, social separation, status loss, and discrimination. Stigma is formed when all five of these components are present simultaneously. Overall, Link and Phelan’s stigma-forming mechanisms are widely recognized by scholars. Occupational stigma received early attention as a branch of stigma research. Hughes [42] then introduced the concept of “dirty work” in relation to occupational stigma. Ashforth and Kreiner [17] suggest that occupational stigmatization provokes negative reactions when a job violates society’s standards of “normal” or “clean” work. On this basis, they define occupational stigma as “tasks that are considered unclean, offensive or humiliating in a particular social context”.
Morgan suggests that female leadership stigma refers to negative and derogatory labels for female leaders in work organization, performance appraisals, and promotions [43], classifying the manifestations of female leadership stigma into three categories: procedural, interpersonal, and personal. This stigma is mainly reflected in social isolation and sexual harassment.
Stigma consciousness is the perception of stigmatizing prejudice in work and life [44], which Pinel [45] defines as the process of perceiving prejudice in interactions with others due to individual differences. Pinel first developed the female stigma consciousness scale in 1999 to measure stigma consciousness.

2.3. Intrinsic Mechanisms of Female Leadership Stigma Consciousness

Lekchiri et al. [46] examine the psychological impacts of stigma consciousness on female leaders. These impacts mainly include depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and low motivation. In terms of career development, women’s professional autonomy and career opportunities can be reduced due to the negative impact on their careers caused by pregnancy, breastfeeding, etc., which can also decrease their employability and professional status [47]. Regarding family life, because the reality is that many female leaders choose to marry and have children later in life to meet their career development needs, therefore, it is difficult for them to balance work and family, and they often feel guilty because they are too involved in their work to fulfill their role as mothers [48], which triggers work–family conflict [49] and reduces life satisfaction.

2.4. Consciousness Stigma and Career Development for Female Leaders

Career development is the ability of an individual to achieve career growth in an organization [50]. Research has found that organizational gender bias (e.g., gender bias in hiring, pay, and promotions, as well as occupational gender segregation) affects women’s initiative and coping, reduces their ambition and desire to be leaders, and is detrimental to their career development [51]. Pinel [44] found that, when others negatively label female leaders at work and in life, it may adversely affect the promotion process and reduce their sense of well-being, which may lead to choosing to leave the stigmatized situation.
Research has shown that employees are more likely to experience negative psychological emotions such as burnout, stress, or depression when available resources are insufficient to meet job demands [52]. Female leaders significantly impeded from promotion may develop negative psychological work behaviors to protect themselves from falling into a spiral of resource loss by adopting defensive patterns. Such defenses include diminishing their achievement motivation or transferring personal resources to their family for psychological compensation [53]. Most female leaders emphasize the value of work–family balance, but the reality is that women’s unique “triple stage”, i.e., pregnancy, childbearing, and breastfeeding, significantly impacts their careers, decreasing their professional autonomy, career opportunities, employability, and professional status [47]. Thus, the consciousness of stigma against female leaders in organizations may negatively impact their career development.
Hypothesis 1.
The stigma consciousness of female leaders negatively impacts career development.

2.5. Stigma Consciousness and Work–Life Balance for Female Leaders

Work–life balance refers to an individual’s freedom to allocate time and energy between work and life in such a way that demands are equally balanced and work–life role conflicts are minimized [54,55]. Research has shown that female leaders are often responsible for parenting and taking care of families in addition to work, causing them to face more work–family conflicts than male leaders [8]. As a result, women often must fulfill family and work responsibilities, and family financial responsibilities require them to strike a balance between both. Thus, when they perceive gender bias, they are more likely to remain silent and stoic [56]. In the long run, working women will develop a negative psychological state that can affect their work and zest for life. In the Conservation of Resource theory, work–family conflict is caused by an individual’s excessive consumption of resources in one field (such as work) and inability to invest resources in another (such as family) [57]. Ongoing family–work conflict interpenetrates and reinforces work and family stress, causing chronic stress with devastating effects on behavior and health [58]. Family–work conflict can also lead to negative work outcomes, such as the inability to achieve positive work states [59]. At the same time, conflict is often seen as a source of stress and distress, with home–work conflict causing working women to experience negative emotions like frustration and depression [60,61]. Therefore, this paper proposes:
Hypothesis 2.
Female leadership stigma consciousness negatively affects work–life balance.

2.6. The Mediating Role of Emotional Exhaustion

Emotional exhaustion is a state of fatigue resulting from the overuse of mental and emotional resources. It results from a stress response induced by stressors in the workplace, leading to the depletion of emotional and physiological resources. This condition manifests as a sense of depletion where an individual’s emotional and physiological resources become exhausted [62]. When individuals experience stress, frustration, and obstacles (e.g., female leaders’ consciousness of stigma), they tend to overexert their self-control resources and experience depression, leading to depleted emotional resources [63].
Lekchiri et al. [46] examine the psychological effects of stigma on female leaders, including depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and low motivation. Brotheridge and Lee [64] applied the COR theory to explain the role of emotional regulation in influencing job burnout, i.e., employees need to expend substantial internal resources to satisfy job demands but also try to find other supportive resources around them to alleviate the negative impacts generated by burnout and thus make up for the loss of their resources. When employees’ resource depletion at work reaches the edge of their resource stock, they will feel depleted and, to save the existing resources, they will usually cease investing them; thus, burnout will lead to a decline in performance, absenteeism, and other consequences [65].
Research has shown that the higher the level of emotional exhaustion, the stronger the tendency to leave a job [66], which can be detrimental to career progression. Therefore, emotional exhaustion negatively affects career development. In addition, relevant research has found that, when female leaders invest and consume excessive emotional resources at work, they invest less at home, inevitably facing conflicts between their work and home roles [67], which is unconducive to work–life balance. As a result, emotional exhaustion can also negatively impact work–life balance. Therefore, this paper proposes the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 3.
Emotional exhaustion mediates the effect of female leadership stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance.

2.7. The Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy was first introduced by Bandura [68] in 1977, and Schwarzer et al. [69] then divided it into general and specific self-efficacy. They define general self-efficacy as “an individual’s overall belief in his or her self-efficacy in the face of a variety of demanding or novel situations”. General self-efficacy affects how individuals cope with various situations, i.e., whether they engage in coping behaviors, how much effort they expend, and how long they persist in facing obstacles and unpleasant situations. General self-efficacy is effective in reducing the negative effects of stress on individuals [70,71]. Stumpf [72] and others found that individuals with high self-efficacy tend to use positive problem-oriented coping strategies, whereas those with low self-efficacy often use negative emotion-oriented coping strategies. Research has also shown that a positive effect negatively correlates with emotional exhaustion, and a negative effect positively correlates with emotional exhaustion [73].
According to the COR theory, individuals with abundant resources can better plan for future contingencies [31]. Thus, as an important personal resource, self-efficacy will influence female leaders’ behavioral choices when their work lives are affected by externally imposed stigma pressures. Therefore, we suggest that the higher the self-efficacy, the weaker the positive effect of female leadership stigma consciousness on emotional exhaustion. Conversely, the lower the self-efficacy, the stronger the positive effect of female leaders’ stigma consciousness on emotional exhaustion. Based on the above analysis, the following hypotheses are put forward:
Hypothesis 4.
Self-efficacy negatively moderates the relationship between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion.
Combining Hypothesis 3 on the mediating effect of emotional exhaustion between consciousness stigma and career development and work–life balance and Hypothesis 4 on the moderating effect of self-efficacy between consciousness stigma and emotional exhaustion, we further construct a moderated-mediation model. Based on this, we propose the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5.
Self-efficacy can moderate the mediating effect that female leaders’ stigma consciousness affects career development and work–life balance through emotional exhaustion. Specifically, the more positive female leaders’ self-efficacy is, the mediating effect weakens.
The above research hypothesis is shown in Figure 1.
This model consists of five variables: Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness (FLSC) = the independent variable (X), Emotional Exhaustion (EX) = the mediating variable (M), Self-Efficacy = the moderating variable (M), and Career Development (CD), Work–Life Balance (WLB) = the dependent variable (Y).

3. Research Methods and Data Collection

This study distributed 421 electronic questionnaires to female leaders of Chinese enterprises and public institutions using the Credamo platform (an online sample base). All questionnaires were collected, with a 100% recovery rate. After excluding 21 invalid questionnaires, 400 valid questionnaires remained, with a recovery rate of valid questionnaires of about 95.0%, which is a good recovery outcome. The study analyzed the data from the recovered valid questionnaires in terms of distribution by province, age, education level, marital status, occupation, children’s status, years of work experience, and the nature of the organization.
The descriptive statistics sample information is as follows: most respondents are between 21 and 40 years old, accounting for 87.5% of the sample. Regarding educational level, 71.5% have bachelor’s degrees. For marital and child status, 66.8% of the respondents are married, 34.8% do not have any children, and 43.3% have children under age six. The years of work experience are mainly between 0 and 10 years, accounting for 80.1% of the sample. The nature of respondents’ organizations is dominated by private enterprises (47.8%), state-owned enterprises (22.3%), and institutions (21.3%). The characteristics of the above data reflect the overall present situation of female leaders.
The scales used to measure the variables in this study were adapted instruments from well-established scales from previous studies, which have good reliability and validity in different research contexts. To ensure the accuracy and reliability of the questionnaire content, the study strictly followed the standard translation–back translation procedure. The scale employs a Likert 5-point scoring method, with scores ranging from 1 to 5, representing “very non-conformant” to “very conformant”, where higher scores indicate a stronger identification.
To measure female leaders’ stigma consciousness, we assess their perception of stigma bias in both work and life. We utilized the scale developed by Shantz and Booth [18], which consists of six items. For example, some items include “Many women in non-leadership positions hold negative thoughts about women leaders, even if they do not express them”, “Stereotypes of women leaders personally affect me”, and “Many women in non-leadership positions find it challenging to see us as equals”.
Emotional exhaustion signifies a state of fatigue resulting from the overuse of mental and emotional resources. In this context, the Maslach and Jackson [74] scale was employed, encompassing seven items. For instance, items include “I feel exhausted at the end of the workday” and “I feel emotionally drained about my job”.
When assessing career development, we consider an individual’s ability to achieve career growth within an organization. To evaluate career development, we adapted two items from Mobley et al. [75] and Porter and Steers [76]. For example, items include “I believe that my current job will lead to the fulfillment of my future career goals” and “My current job is relevant to my professional growth and development”.
Work–life balance pertains to an individual’s ability to allocate time and energy between work and personal life. We measured the work–life balance using five items from Hill et al. [77]. Example items encompass “How easy or difficult is it for you to balance work with the demands of your personal and family life?” and “When I take time off, I am able to separate myself from work and enjoy myself”.
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s overall beliefs in their self-efficacy when confronting a variety of demanding or novel situations. In this study, self-efficacy was assessed using the self-efficacy scale constructed by Schwarzer R [69], comprising 10 items. Higher scores on this scale indicate higher levels of self-efficacy. For example, items include “I can solve problems if I try my best” and “I am confident that I can effectively cope with unexpected challenges”.
The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for this study’s variables are shown in Table 1. Cronbach’s α is 0.946 for female leaders’ stigma consciousness, 0.833 for emotional exhaustion, 0.728 for career development, 0.776 for work–life balance, and 0.887 for self-efficacy. The Cronbach’s α of the variables in this study are all greater than 0.7, indicating high reliability of the scale.
As shown in Table 2, the researchers first conducted a Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test (KMO) and Bartlett’s test, yielding a KMO value of 0.800, which is greater than 0.7. This result indicates that the study is suitable for factor analysis. Subsequently, utilizing the maximum variance method, the second matrix rotation was employed to extract five common factors. The factor loadings of each common factor are higher than the other factors, effectively distinguishing the variables. This outcome suggests that the scale used in this study demonstrated high reliability.

4. Data Analysis and Hypothesis Tests

4.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Homology Error Test

As shown in Table 3, Mplus8.0 was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis on the competitive pair model, and the five-factor, four-factor, three-factor, two-factor, and single-factor models were tested. As shown in the table, for the five-factor model, χ2/df = 3.269 < 5, CFI = 0.926 > 0.9, IFI = 0.926 > 0.9, TLI = 0.915 > 0.9, GFI = 0.846 > 0.8, and RMSEA = 0.075 < 0.08, which indicates that the model is well fitted. By comparing the five models, all the fits of the five-factor model are better than the other factor models. This result suggests that this study largely reduces the effects of common method bias.

4.2. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Coefficients between the Variables

In this study, Pearson correlation analysis was applied to test the relationship between the variables, and the results are shown in Table 4. The table presents a two-by-two correlation between female leaders’ stigma consciousness, emotional exhaustion, career advancement, work–life balance, and self-efficacy, providing a basis for testing the hypotheses.

4.3. Hypothetical Tests

This study examines structural equation modeling as a whole, and the path diagram of Model is shown below in Figure 2.

4.3.1. Main Effect Test

The main effect test was conducted using SmartPLS4.0 software; the results are shown in Table 5.
The path analysis of the model shows that the path coefficient of female leadership stigma consciousness to emotional exhaustion is 0.256 in the 95% confidence interval [0.160, 0.352], excluding 0, p = 0.000 < 0.001, indicating that female leadership stigma perception positively impacts emotional exhaustion. The path coefficient of female leader stigma consciousness to work–life balance is −0.112, which is at the 95% confidence interval [−0.197, −0.023] and does not contain 0, p = 0.012 < 0.05, suggesting that female leader stigma consciousness is negatively oriented toward work–life balance. The coefficient of the path of female leader stigma consciousness to career development is −0.778, which is at the 95% confidence interval [−0.848, −0.702] and does not contain 0, p = 0.000 < 0.001, indicating that female leader stigma consciousness negatively affects career development. The remaining paths are significant. Thus, Hypotheses 1 and 2 are supported.

4.3.2. Analysis of Mediating Effect Test Results

From Table 6, the indirect effect of female leadership stigma consciousness through emotional exhaustion on career development is −0.027, the standard error is 0.012, the 95% confidence interval is [−0.052, −0.004], which does not contain 0, and the path of female leadership stigma consciousness to emotional exhaustion to career development is significant. The indirect effect of female leader stigma consciousness through emotional exhaustion on work–life balance is −0.105, the standard error is 0.022, and the 95% confidence interval is [−0.149, −0.066], which did not include 0. The path of female leader stigma consciousness through emotional exhaustion to work–life balance is significant. Therefore, emotional exhaustion plays a mediating role between female leadership stigma consciousness, career development, and work–life balance. Thus, Hypothesis 3 is supported.

4.3.3. Analysis of Moderation Effect Test Results

As shown in Table 7, the interaction term between female leadership stigma consciousness and self-efficacy is negative, β = −0.150 and t = −2.865. The 95% confidence interval is [−0.253, −0.047], excluding 0, p = 0.004 < 0.01. The adjustment effect is significant.
For the moderating effect of self-efficacy, this study conducted a simple slope test. That is, the relationship between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion was tested under different levels of self-efficacy. As shown in Figure 3, female leadership stigma consciousness has a stronger effect on emotional exhaustion in low self-efficacy levels than in high self-efficacy levels. That is, self-efficacy weakens the positive effect of female leadership stigma consciousness on emotional exhaustion.

4.3.4. Mediated Moderation Analysis

As shown in Table 8, at high self-efficacy levels, the indirect effect of female leader stigma consciousness on work–life balance through emotional exhaustion is −0.115, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.164, −0.072], which does not contain 0. The indirect effect of female leader stigma consciousness on career development through emotional exhaustion is −0.030, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.058, −0.005], not including 0, indicating that all indirect effects are significant at high self-efficacy levels. In the mediated moderated effect, the moderator of self-efficacy is 0.064 with a 95% confidence interval of [0.014, 0.119], which does not contain 0; hence, the mediated moderation effect is significant. At low self-efficacy levels, the indirect effect of female leader stigma perception on work–life balance through emotional exhaustion is −0.037, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.090, −0.009], which does not contain 0. The indirect effect of female leader stigma perception on career development through emotional exhaustion is −0.010, with a 95% confidence interval of [−0.028, 0.003], containing 0, indicating that none of the indirect effects are significant with low self-efficacy. For the mediated moderated effect, the moderator of self-efficacy is 0.017, with a 95% confidence interval of [0.001, 0.038], which does not contain zero; thus, the mediated moderation was significant. Therefore, Hypotheses 4 and 5 are supported.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theoretical Contributions

The key objective of this study is to explore the intrinsic mechanism of female leaders’ occupational stigma consciousness regarding career development and work–life balance based on the integrative theoretical guidance model of occupational stigma theory and COR theory as the analytical framework. Furthermore, this study aims to construct an influence model with emotional exhaustion as the mediating variable and self-efficacy as the moderating variable. Based on the COR theory, this study explores the internal mechanisms of female leaders’ occupational stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance through a survey of 400 female leaders. The study found that stigma consciousness has a significant negative impact on career development and work–life balance. The results of this study show that emotional exhaustion plays a mediating role, and self-efficacy negatively moderates the relationship between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion.
Regarding the impact of stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance, the findings of this study echo those of Ferguson et al. [78], who confirmed that female leaders face more work–family conflicts [8], validating the negative impact of stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance. In terms of the mediating role of emotional exhaustion, the present study’s findings are consistent with the findings of Adriano et al. [67], confirming that emotional exhaustion can negatively impact work–life balance and the importance of emotional exhaustion as a mediator. Quantitative studies have shown that the moderating role of self-efficacy negatively moderates the relationship between female leaders’ stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion. It also moderates the mediating effect of female leaders’ stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance through emotional exhaustion. In other words, the more positive the female leader’s self-efficacy, the weaker the negative influence of emotional depletion. This is similar to Penney’s and Ma J. [70,73] studies, which emphasized that an individual’s positive affect is negatively related to emotional exhaustion and a negative affect is positively related to emotional exhaustion. Individuals with higher self-efficacy resources are more inclined to react positively when faced with work stress. Unlike previous studies that were mainly based on social identity theory analysis, this study integrates occupational stigma theory and COR theory to construct a research model of the negative impact of female leadership stigma perceptions, explore the internal mechanism that links female leadership stigma consciousness to career development and work–life balance, and verify the correlation between them.
First, this study explores the mechanisms underlying the impact of stigma consciousness on female leaders’ career development and work–life balance. Hobfoll [35] only superficially explores the generation of work pressure and coping within the basic framework of the COR theory. Furthermore, the existing studies on the stigma of female leadership in China are mostly based on theoretical analysis and lack empirical testing. To address these research gaps, this study constructed a research model of the intrinsic mechanism of female leadership stigma consciousness regarding career development and work–life balance based on the COR theory.
Second, this study reveals the negative impact of female leadership stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance. It has been shown that the higher the level of emotional exhaustion, the stronger the tendency to leave a job [66], which can negatively affect career development. Based on the COR theory, we found that emotional exhaustion mediates the effect of female leadership stigma consciousness on career development and work–life balance. Our finding also reveals that self-efficacy, as a more stable personality trait, is an important subjective psychological resource for mitigating the negative effect of stigma consciousness [79]. Specifically, positive self-efficacy attenuates the negative effects of the stigma consciousness of female leadership on emotional exhaustion. At the same time, self-efficacy can mediate the mediating effect of emotional exhaustion between female leadership stigma consciousness and leaders’ performance outcomes (i.e., career development and work–life balance).

5.2. Practical Significance

This study also provides some management insights for female leaders and various organizations. First, we should address the negative perception of female leaders at the source to reduce discrimination and prejudice. Second, it is necessary to actively support the work of female leaders and help solve the difficulties they face to promote their career development and work–life balance. Third, female leaders should adopt more positive coping strategies (e.g., enhancing self-efficacy) in the face of negative comments to alleviate the emotional depletion caused by a sense of stigmatization, thereby reducing its negative impact on career development and work–life balance.
Organizations, families, and society must work together to combat stigma effectively, remove barriers to female leadership development, and provide more support and care. For organizations, promotion systems and processes must be standardized and transparent to reduce the stigma attached to the promotion of female leaders by the rest of the organization and to provide leadership training for new female leaders. At the same time, a reasonable performance appraisal system should be set up to measure the effectiveness of female leaders’ work by means of process and result as well as subjective and objective indicators instead of attributing it unilaterally to gender. In addition, it is necessary to create a gender-equal organizational climate for female leaders, advocate a family-friendly work environment, and help female leaders reduce emotional exhaustion to achieve work–life balance.
To support female leaders at home, the support and encouragement of family members are needed, including sharing household chores, childcare, and spiritual comfort. We should offer understanding to female leaders who are without children or unmarried instead of demanding their commitment. Regarding society, organizations such as the Women’s Union can provide psychological counseling and vocational guidance services for female leaders and help educate the public to gradually change people’s one-sided perceptions and misconceptions, creating a more tolerant and egalitarian society.

5.3. Limitations and Future Developments

This study also has some limitations. First, this study’s questionnaire was completed by the female leaders themselves; thus, the problem of a homology error is unavoidable. Future studies could consider data collection from multiple sources. It will be beneficial to collect data from female leaders’ coworkers, subordinates, or superiors to objectively measure the performance and competence of these leaders, while stigma consciousness can be assessed by the leaders themselves. Second, self-efficacy among female leaders may differ due to varying personality traits, which affects the moderating effect of self-efficacy. The present study ignored the differences in self-efficacy among female leaders with different personality traits. Future research should consider incorporating moderating variables associated with personality traits into a research model of female leadership stigmatization.
Second, this study focuses on the negative impact of stigma on female leaders in China. However, there may be differences in the levels of stigma consciousness in leaders from different cultures, and the impact of stigma on these leaders may vary across different cultures. Therefore, future research should examine the stigma consciousness of female leaders from different cultures and regions. The participants who took part in this study’s questionnaire were primarily concentrated in regions such as Guangdong, Guangxi, Jiangsu, Shandong, Hebei, and Chongqing. Consequently, there are certain limitations concerning the sample’s geographical distribution. Future research endeavors could consider targeting major cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, Shenzhen, and Zhejiang to investigate whether stigma perceptions among female leaders also exhibit regional variations.
Finally, as a product of social construction, future research should focus on the social role of occupational stigma. From a constraint function perspective, stigmas have some value. When industries or individuals have poor records, stigmatizing them and making their reputation known can act as a form of societal control [80]. Future research could focus on the role of occupational stigma in the behavioral norms of industries, enterprises, and employees, including the impact of occupational stigma on industry malpractice, preventive and precautionary measures for enterprises, and the impact of occupational stigma on individual positive behavior.

6. Conclusions

This study offers empirical evidence to uncover the negative impact of female leaders’ occupational stigma consciousness. It also delves into the underlying mechanisms that link occupational stigma consciousness to negative outcomes for female leaders through emotional exhaustion. Additionally, this study also provides a research paradigm for the application of Conservation of Resources theory in occupational stigma through empirical evidence, and explores the internal mechanism between female leaders’ occupational stigma consciousness and negative impact results. These results provide valuable managerial insights for organizations to address and alleviate the negative consequences of female leaders’ stigma consciousness.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Q.L. and G.L.; methodology, G.L.; software, Q.L.; validation, Q.L. and G.L.; formal analysis, Q.L.; investigation, Q.L.; resources, Q.L.; data curation, Q.L.; writing—original draft preparation, Q.L.; writing—review and editing, G.L.; visualization, G.L.; supervision, G.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to the interview privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhang, G.; Jia, Z.; Yan, S. Does gender matter? The relationship comparison of strategic leadership on organizational ambidextrous behavior between male and female CEOs. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Wang, J.; Reilly, C.V.; Fatema, K. Gender bias, institutional predicaments and innovativeness of female CEOs in China. J. Dev. Entrep. 2022, 27, 2250007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Heilman, M.E. Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Res. Organ. Behav. 2012, 32, 113–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lyness, K.S.; Thompson, D.E. Above the glass ceiling? A comparison of matched samples of female and male executives. J. Appl. Psychol. 1997, 82, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Vial, A.C.; Napier, J.L.; Brescoll, V.L. A bed of thorns: Female leaders and the self-reinforcing cycle of illegitimacy. Leadersh. Q. 2016, 27, 400–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ibarra, H.; Ely, R.; Kolb, D. Women rising: The unseen barriers. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2013, 91, 60–66. [Google Scholar]
  7. Koch, A.J.; D’Mello, S.D.; Sackett, P.R. A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. J. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 100, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Eagly, A.H.; Karau, S.J. Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychol. Rev. 2002, 109, 573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Elsesser, K.M. Gender bias against female leaders: A review. In Handbook on Well-Being of Working Women; Connerley, M.L., Wu, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2016; pp. 161–173. [Google Scholar]
  10. Goldin, C. Career and Family: Women’s Century-Long Journey toward Equity; Princeton University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  11. Hurley, D.; Choudhary, A. Factors influencing attainment of CEO position for women. Gend. Manag. Int. J. 2016, 31, 250–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Tatli, A.; Ozturk, M.B.; Woo, H.S. Individualization and marketization of responsibility for gender equality: The case of female managers in China. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2017, 56, 407–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lee Cooke, F.; Xiao, Y. Gender roles and organizational HR practices: The case of women’s careers in accountancy and consultancy firms in China. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2014, 53, 23–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cahusac, E.; Kanji, S. Giving up: How gendered organizational cultures push mothers out. Gend. Work Organ. 2014, 21, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Schein, V.E. Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers. J. Appl. Psych. 1975, 60, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Janssen, S.; Sartore, T.S.; Backes-Gellner, U. Discriminatory social attitudes and varying gender pay gaps within firms. Ind. Labor. Relat. Rev. 2016, 69, 253–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ashforth, B.E.; Kreiner, G.E. “How can you do it?”: Dirty work and the challenge of constructing a positive identity. Acad. Manage Rev. 1999, 24, 413–434. [Google Scholar]
  18. Shantz, A.; Booth, J.E. Service employees and self-verification: The roles of occupational stigma consciousness and core self-evaluations. Hum. Relat. 2014, 67, 1439–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kruglanski, A.W.; Jasko, K.; Milyavsky, M.; Chernikova, M.; Webber, D.; Pierro, A.; Di Santo, D. Cognitive consistency theory in social psychology: A paradigm reconsidered. Psychol. Inq. 2018, 29, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chapman, L.J.; Chapman, J.P.; Raulin, M.L. Scales for physical and social anhedonia. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 1976, 85, 374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Baldissarri, C.; Andrighetto, L.; Volpato, C. When work does not ennoble man: Psychological consequences of working objectification. TPM Test. Psychom. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 2014, 21, 327–339. [Google Scholar]
  22. Shigihara, A.M. “(Not) forever talk”: Restaurant employees managing occupational stigma consciousness. Qual. Res. Organ. Manag. Int. J. 2018, 13, 384–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wildes, V.J. Stigma in food service work: How it affects restaurant servers’ intention to stay in the business or recommend a job to another. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2005, 5, 213–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Nimri, R.; Kensbock, S.; Bailey, J.; Jennings, G.; Patiar, A. Realizing dignity in housekeeping work: Evidence of five star hotels. J. Hum. Resour. Hosp. Tour. 2020, 19, 368–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Link, B.G.; Phelan, J.C. Conceptualizing stigma. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2001, 27, 363–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resources: A rejoinder to the commentaries. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 50, 419–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kusluvan, H.; Akova, O.; Kusluvan, S. Occupational stigma and career commitment: Testing mediation and moderation effects of occupational self-esteem. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2022, 102, 103149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jerez-Jerez, M.J.; Melewar, T.C. The consequence of waiters’ professional identity on passion for work and its effects on employee turnover: A qualitative approach. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2020, 23, 767–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cripps, K.; Hine, C. Generation Z and hospitality careers. Hosp. Soc. 2020, 10, 173–195. [Google Scholar]
  30. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am. Psychol. 1989, 44, 513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Hobfoll, S.E. The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. J. Appl. Psychol. 2001, 50, 337–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jolly, P.M.; Kong, D.T.; Kim, K.Y. Social support at work: An integrative review. J. Organ. Behav. 2021, 42, 229–251. [Google Scholar]
  33. Luthans, F.; Avolio, B.J.; Avey, J.B.; Norman, S.M. Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Pers. Psychol. 2007, 60, 541–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Purwanto, A.; Asbari, M.; Hartuti, H.; Setiana, Y.N.; Fahmi, K. Effect of psychological capital and authentic leadership on innovation work behavior. Int. J. Soc. Manag. Stud. 2021, 2, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2011, 84, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cacioppo, J.T.; Gardner, W.L. Emotion. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1999, 50, 191–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Halbesleben, J.R.; Buckley, M.R. Burnout in organizational life. J. Manage. 2004, 30, 859–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Melamed, S.; Shirom, A.; Toker, S.; Berliner, S.; Shapira, I. Burnout and risk of cardiovascular disease: Evidence, possible causal paths, and promising research directions. Psychol. Bull. 2006, 132, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Soral, P.; Pati, S.P.; Singh, S.K.; Cooke, F.L. Coping with dirty work: A meta-synthesis from a resource perspective. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 2022, 32, 100861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kreiner, G.E.; Ashforth, B.E.; Sluss, D.M. Identity dynamics in occupational dirty work: Integrating social identity and system justification perspectives. Organ. Sci. 2006, 17, 619–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1963; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  42. Hughes, E.C. Men and Their Work; Free Press: Glencoe, IL, USA, 1958. [Google Scholar]
  43. Wang, F. Navigating the Dynamic Leadership Labyrinth: Exploring Narratives of Women Academics in Chinese Higher Education. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  44. Pinel, E.C. Stigma consciousness: The psychological legacy of social stereotypes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1999, 76, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Pinel, E.C. You’re just saying that because I’m a woman: Stigma consciousness and attributions to discrimination. Self Identity 2004, 3, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lekchiri, S.; Crowder, C.; Schnerre, A.; Eversole, B.A. Perceived workplace gender-bias and psychological impact: The case of women in a Moroccan higher education institution. Eur. J. Train. Dev. 2019, 43, 339–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kalysh, K.; Kulik, C.T.; Perera, S. Help or hindrance? Work–life practices and women in management. Leadersh. Q. 2016, 27, 504–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kerr, M.L.; Rasmussen, H.F.; Smiley, P.A.; Fanning, K.A.; Buttitta, K.V.; Benson, L.; Borelli, J.L. Within-and between-family differences in mothers’ guilt and shame: Caregiving, coparenting, and attachment. J. Fam. Psychol. 2021, 35, 265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Little, L.M.; Hinojosa, A.S.; Paustian-Underdahl, S.; Zipay, K.P. Managing the harmful effects of unsupportive organizations during pregnancy. J. Appl. Psychol. 2018, 103, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bedeian, A.G.; Kemery, E.R.; Pizzolatto, A.B. Career commitment and expected utility of present job as predictors of turnover intentions and turnover behavior. J. Vocat. Behav. 1991, 39, 331–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bailey, D.; Hufford, M.M.; Emmerson, M.S.; Eckert, S.A. Identifying and living leadership in the lives of prekindergarten through 4th-grade girls: The story of one intentional leadership identity development program. J. Res. Child. Educ. 2017, 31, 487–507. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kendler, K.S.; Kessler, R.C.; Walters, E.E.; MacLean, C.; Neale, M.C.; Heath, A.C.; Eaves, L.J. Stressful life events, genetic liability, and onset of an episode of major depression in women. Focus 2010, 8, 459–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Baltes, B.B.; Heydens-Gahir, H.A. Reduction of work-family conflict through the use of selection, optimization, and compensation behaviors. J. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 88, 1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Lakkoju, S. Work-life satisfaction in academia: Myth or reality? Decision 2020, 47, 153–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Silaban, H.; Margaretha, M. The impact work-life balance toward job satisfaction and employee retention: Study of millennial employees in Bandung city, Indonesia. Int. J. Innov. Econ. Dev. 2021, 7, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Brinkman, B.G.; Garcia, K.; Rickard, K.M. “What I wanted to do was…” discrepancies between college women’s desired and reported responses to gender prejudice. Sex Roles 2011, 65, 344–355. [Google Scholar]
  57. Allen, T.D.; Johnson, R.C.; Kiburz, K.M.; Shockley, K.M. Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Pers. Psychol. 2013, 66, 345–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Bakker, A.B.; Demerouti, E. Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2017, 22, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ten Brummelhuis, L.L.; Bakker, A.B. A resource perspective on the work–home interface: The work-home resources model. Am. Psychol. 2012, 67, 545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Berkman, L.F.; Liu, S.Y.; Hammer, L.; Moen, P.; Klein, L.C.; Kelly, E.; Fay, M.; Davis, K.; Durham, M.; Karuntzos, G.; et al. Work-family conflict, cardiometabolic risk, and sleep duration in nursing employees. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2015, 20, 420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Shockley, K.M.; Allen, T.D. Episodic work-family conflict, cardiovascular indicators, and social support: An experience sampling approach. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2013, 18, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Maslach, C. Job burnout: New directions in research and intervention. Curr. Dir. Psychol. 2003, 12, 189–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Sardeshmukh, S.R.; Sharma, D.; Golden, T.D. Impact of telework on exhaustion and job engagement: A job demands and job resources model. N. Technol. Work. Employ. 2012, 27, 193–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lee, Y.H. Emotional labor, teacher burnout, and turnover intention in high-school physical education teaching. Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev. 2019, 25, 236–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rhee, S.Y.; Hur, W.M.; Kim, M. The relationship of coworker incivility to job performance and the moderating role of self-efficacy and compassion at work: The job demands-resources (JD-R) approach. J. Bus. Psychol. 2017, 32, 711–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Skaalvik, E.M.; Skaalvik, S. Job demands and job resources as predictors of teacher motivation and well-being. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2018, 21, 1251–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Adriano, J.; Callaghan, C.W. Work-life balance, job satisfaction and retention: Turnover intentions of professionals in part-time study. South. Afr. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 2020, 23, a3028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 1977, 84, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Schwarzer, R.; Bäßler, J.; Kwiatek, P.; Schröder, K.; Zhang, J.X. The assessment of optimistic self-beliefs: Comparison of the German, Spanish, and Chinese versions of the general self-efficacy scale. J. Appl. Psychol. 1997, 46, 69–88. [Google Scholar]
  70. Ma, J.; Ollier-Malaterre, A.; Lu, C.Q. The impact of techno-stressors on work–life balance: The moderation of job self-efficacy and the mediation of emotional exhaustion. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 122, 106811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Siu, O.L.; Lu, C.Q.; Spector, P.E. Employees’ well-being in Greater China: The direct and moderating effects of general self-efficacy. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007, 56, 288–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Stumpf, S.A.; Brief, A.P.; Hartman, K. Self-efficacy expectations and coping with career-related events. J. Vocat. Behav. 1987, 31, 91–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Penney, L.M.; Hunter, E.M.; Perry, S.J. Personality and counterproductive work behaviour: Using conservation of resources theory to narrow the profile of deviant employees. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2011, 84, 58–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Maslach, C.; Jackson, S.E. The measurement of experienced burnout. J. Organ. Behav. 1981, 2, 99–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Mobley, W.H.; Griffeth, R.W.; Hand, H.H.; Meglino, B.M. Review and conceptual analysis of the employee turnover process. Psychol. Bull. 1979, 86, 493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Porter, L.W.; Steers, R.M. Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychol. Bull. 1973, 80, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hill, E.J.; Hawkins, A.J.; Ferris, M.; Weitzman, M. Finding an extra day a week: The positive influence of perceived job flexibility on work and family life balance. Fam. Relat. 2001, 50, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Ferguson, T.W. Female leadership and role congruity within the clergy: Communal leaders experience no gender differences yet agentic women continue to suffer backlash. Sex Roles 2018, 78, 409–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Mao, Y.; He, J.; Morrison, A.M.; Andres Coca-Stefaniak, J. Effects of tourism CSR on employee psychological capital in the COVID-19 crisis: From the perspective of conservation of resources theory. Curr. Issues Tour. 2021, 24, 2716–2734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Tyler, I.; Slater, T. Rethinking the sociology of stigma. Sociol. Rev. 2018, 66, 721–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 15945 g001
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Sustainability 15 15945 g001
Sustainability 15 15945 g002
Figure 2. Structural equation modeling. Notes: this model consists of five variables: Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness (FLSC) = the independent variable (X), Emotional Exhaustion (EX) = the mediating variable (M), Self-Efficacy = the moderating variable (M), and Career Development (CD), Work–Life Balance (WLB) = the dependent variable (Y).
Figure 2. Structural equation modeling. Notes: this model consists of five variables: Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness (FLSC) = the independent variable (X), Emotional Exhaustion (EX) = the mediating variable (M), Self-Efficacy = the moderating variable (M), and Career Development (CD), Work–Life Balance (WLB) = the dependent variable (Y).
Sustainability 15 15945 g002
Sustainability 15 15945 g003
Figure 3. The moderating role of self-efficacy between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion.
Figure 3. The moderating role of self-efficacy between female leadership stigma consciousness and emotional exhaustion.
Sustainability 15 15945 g003
Table 1. Reliability analysis.
Table 1. Reliability analysis.
VariablesCronbach’s αItem
Female Leaders
Stigma Consciousness		0.9465
Emotional Exhaustion0.8337
Career Development0.7282
Work–Life Balance0.7763
Self-Efficacy0.88710
Table 2. Validity analysis.
Table 2. Validity analysis.
KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin sampling suitability quantity 0.800
Bartlett’s test for sphericityApproximate chi-square9521.200
Degrees of freedom351
Salience0.000
Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis.
Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis.
Modelχ2dfχ2/dfCFIIFITLIGFIRMSEA
Five-factor model 1003.5933073.2690.9260.9260.9150.8460.075
Four-factor model 2067.1073116.6470.8130.8140.7890.7030.119
Three-factor model 3211.89231410.2290.6920.6930.6560.6430.152
Two-factor model 3552.50531611.2420.6560.6570.6180.5930.160
Single-factor model 4757.84531715.0090.5280.5300.4770.4160.187
Note: five-factor model: FLSC, EX, CD, WLB, Self-Efficacy; four-factor model: FLSC, EX, CD, WLB + Self-Efficacy; three-factor model: FLSC, EX, CD + WLB + Self-Efficacy; two-factor model: FLSC, EX + CD + WLB + Self-Efficacy; single-factor model: FLSC + EX + CD + WLB + Self-Efficacy.
Table 4. The standard deviation, mean, and correlation coefficient of variables.
Table 4. The standard deviation, mean, and correlation coefficient of variables.
Correlation
MSD1234
1. Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness2.9831.080
2. Emotional Exhaustion2.5660.8410.315 **
3. Career Development3.1181.118−0.845 **−0.341 **
4. Work–Life Balance3.2931.070−0.258 **−0.384 **0.300 **
5. Self-Efficacy3.9190.610−0.179 **−0.447 **0.135 **0.103 *
Notes: SD = standard deviation, ** correlations are significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). * Correlations are significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).
Table 5. Path coefficient SmartPLS main effect test results.
Table 5. Path coefficient SmartPLS main effect test results.
Pathβ95% Confidence Intervaltp
2.50%97.50%
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness→Emotional Exhaustion0.2560.1600.3525.2450.000
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness→Work-Life Balance−0.112−0.197−0.0232.5110.012
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness→Career Development−0.778−0.848−0.70220.7400.000
Emotional Exhaustion→
Work–Life Balance		−0.407−0.501−0.3168.5870.000
Emotional Exhaustion→
Career Development		−0.110−0.191−0.0322.7660.006
Table 6. Analysis of mediating effect test results.
Table 6. Analysis of mediating effect test results.
Indirect EffectEffect 95% Confidence Interval
BootSEBootLLCIBootULCI
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness→Emotional Exhaustion→
Career Development		−0.0270.012−0.052−0.004
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness→
Emotional Exhaustion→
Work–Life Balance		−0.1050.022−0.149−0.066
Table 7. Analysis of the moderating effect of self-efficacy.
Table 7. Analysis of the moderating effect of self-efficacy.
VariablesCoefftp95% Confidence Interval
LLCIULCI
Female Leaders’ Stigma Consciousness0.1785.2070.0000.1110.245
Self-Efficacy0.5979.6690.0000.4760.718
Int_1−0.150−2.8650.004−0.253−0.047
Notes: ULCI = upper-limit confidence interval, LLCI = lower-limit confidence interval, Int_1 For female leadership stigma consciousness × self-efficacy.
Table 8. Mediated moderation analysis.
Table 8. Mediated moderation analysis.
Dependent VariableAdjustment ValuesEffectBootSE95% Confidence IntervalModerator
BootLLCIBootULCI
Work–Life BalanceM + 1 SD−0.1150.024−0.164−0.072 Conditional Indirect Effect Analysis
M−0.0760.018−0.114−0.045
M – 1 SD−0.0370.025−0.0900.009
Career DevelopmentM + 1 SD−0.0300.014−0.058−0.005
M−0.0200.009−0.040−0.003
M – 1 SD−0.0100.008−0.0280.003
Work–Life Balance 0.0640.0270.0140.119Self-EfficacyMediated moderation analysis
Career Development 0.0170.0100.0010.038Self-Efficacy
Dependent variables: Work–Life Balance, Career Development.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lai, Q.; Lee, G. RETRACTED: An Exploratory Study of the Intrinsic Mechanisms of Occupational Stigma Consciousness, Career Development, and Work–Life Balance among Female Leaders. Sustainability 2023, 15, 15945. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215945

AMA Style

Lai Q, Lee G. RETRACTED: An Exploratory Study of the Intrinsic Mechanisms of Occupational Stigma Consciousness, Career Development, and Work–Life Balance among Female Leaders. Sustainability. 2023; 15(22):15945. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215945

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lai, Qiujia, and Gukseong Lee. 2023. "RETRACTED: An Exploratory Study of the Intrinsic Mechanisms of Occupational Stigma Consciousness, Career Development, and Work–Life Balance among Female Leaders" Sustainability 15, no. 22: 15945. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152215945

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop