Comparing the Efficacy of Two Inclusivity Interventions on Willingness to Invest in Female- Versus Male-Led STEM and Non-STEM Companies

Recent work indicates that gender-inclusive advertisements can increase women’s involvement in STEM fields. However, it remains less clear whether these inclusionary efforts would benefit more from focusing on the pragmatic utility or moral need for inclusivity. This study extends this work by determining the extent to which two unique inclusivity primes can facilitate financial investment in hypothetical male-led and female-led STEM and non-STEM companies. Participants were primed with information about the pragmatic or moral utility of gender inclusivity (or a control state) before rating their willingness to invest in STEM and non-STEM companies led by men and women in addition to their attitudes toward the companies and their CEOs. We also assessed individual differences in right-wing (RWA) and left-wing authoritarianism (LWA) as candidate moderators. Pragmatic inclusivity appeared more effective in inclusionary efforts. Specifically, pragmatic inclusivity promoted inclusive investment attitudes only toward male-led non-STEM companies, particularly for among those high in both RWA and LWA. Our findings provide educational information regarding the effectiveness of traditional social justice arguments, with novel arguments such as pragmatism showing to be more effective than traditional approaches to promote the success of underrepresented groups.