Do Gender Quotas Backfire? The Role of Societal Gender Equality in Shaping Stereotypes

Stereotypes about gender differences in ability shape labor market evaluations, often resulting in biased judgments and unequal opportunities for women. Gender quotas aim to counter these biases by increasing women’s representation but may also change how competence is inferred. This study examines how quota information shifts beliefs about women's ability using an online randomized experiment (N = 1,221; 31 countries). Participants who viewed a balanced hiring display (25 women, 25 men) were randomly assigned to one of three information treatments: no quota, a 40% quota, or a 50% quota; they then reported the number of high-skilled women and men. In the baseline condition, participants reported significantly more high-skilled men than women. Both quota treatmentsreduce the reported number of high-skilled women, but only among female respondents from countries with low gender equality (as measured by the Global Gender Gap Index). In these contexts, women’s success without quotas is read as exceptional competence, a mechanism we term the superwoman effect; but quota information erodes that perceived selectivity. The patterns are most consistent with a stereotyping (representativeness) channel and suggestthat quota policy must consider cultural context to avoid reinforcing bias.