Ann Hopkins tried to apply for partnership at Price Waterhouse in 1982. Lots of her colleagues who gave comments on her viability for the role were sexually charged. They called her macho, said she should go to charm school, and be more feminine. But Price Waterhouse did nothing to disavow reliance on such comments therefore labelling it as sexual discrimination. According to Price Waterhouse, Anne Hopkins must prove two things to show Price Waterhouse violated title seven: 1. Sex played a negative role in the decision 2. She was qualified for the job Price Waterhouse can respond in one major way: the defendant may avoid a finding of liability only by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have made the same decision even if it had not taken the plaintiff’s gender into account. # Summary of the American Psychological Association's Amicus Brief in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins The American Psychological Association's amicus brief presented scientific evidence on sex stereotyping and its role in employment discrimination. The brief made these key arguments: ## Stereotyping Process and Effects - Stereotyping arises from normal cognitive categorization but becomes problematic when overgeneralized - Sex stereotypes create a "double bind" for professional women: if viewed as feminine, they appear incompetent; if assertive, they're labeled abrasive - Research shows that identical job performance is evaluated differently when attributed to women versus men - Women in male-dominated fields face penalties for violating gender norms regardless of qualifications ## Conditions Promoting Stereotyping at Price Waterhouse - Hopkins' status as the only woman among 88 partnership candidates (solo status attracts more scrutiny) - Subjective evaluation criteria for "interpersonal skills" that are vulnerable to bias - Limited information available to partners who barely knew Hopkins yet made strongly negative judgments - The firm's failure to investigate whether comments reflected sex-based double standards ## Methods to Reduce Stereotyping The brief outlined evidence-based approaches organizations can implement: - Provide specific behavioral information about employees to counter stereotypes - Ensure evaluators pay attention to individual characteristics rather than group membership - Create accountability mechanisms and organizational policies that explicitly discourage stereotyping - The brief emphasized that Price Waterhouse took none of these measures The APA concluded that systematic evidence from social psychology supported Dr. Fiske's expert testimony that Hopkins experienced discrimination resulting from sex stereotyping, and that this discrimination was a foreseeable outcome of Price Waterhouse's evaluation practices.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​