Emotional Labor in Academia: The Case of Professors

Author(s): Marcia L. Bellas

Source: The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , Jan., 1999,
Vol. 561, Emotional Labor in the Service Economy (Jan., 1999), pp. 96-110
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. in association with the American Academy of
Political and Social Science

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1049284

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

and Sage Publications, Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ANNALS, AAPSS, 561, January 1999

Emotional Labor in Academia:

The Case of Professors

By MARCIA L. BELLAS

ABSTRACT: Most professors divide their time between teaching, re-

search, service, and, for some, administration. As in the nonacademic
labor market, there is a gendered reward structure in academia.
Teaching and service are most closely aligned with characteristics
and behaviors culturally defined as feminine, and, in the aggregate,
women spend more time in these activities than men. Teaching and
service clearly involve substantial amounts of emotional labor, but
this labor is generally not seen as involving valued skills and is conse-
quently poorly rewarded. In contrast, research and administration
are associated with traits culturally defined as masculine, and, on av-
erage, men spend more time in these activities. Although research
and administration also involve emotional labor, their emotional as-
pects are largely ignored, while intellectual, technical, or leadership
skills are emphasized and highly compensated. Aside from differ-
ences in the propensity of women and men to engage in different ac-
tivities and the gendered reward structure associated with these ac-
tivities, even when the tasks are the same, the type and intensity of
emotional labor required of the sexes may differ.

Marcia L. Bellas is an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Cincin-

nati. Her research interests include gender stratification in labor markets and house
holds, with a focus on academia and the work of professors.

96

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 97

JN her groundbreaking each. Specifically, book,

I assess the emo-
The
Managed Heart (1983), Arlie tional labor required by teaching
Hochschild estimated that approxi- (both inside and outside the class-
mately one-third of all jobs require room), service, research, and admini-
substantial amounts of emotional la- stration and how expectations for
bor and that women are more likely and experiences of emotional labor
to hold such jobs than are men. may differ for the sexes. I suggest
Hochschild stipulated that jobs re- that professors' work activities are
quiring emotional labor involve gendered, and so, too, is the academic
face-to-face or voice-to-voice contact
reward structure. Teaching and serv-
ice are most closely aligned with so-
with the public; require that workers
produce an emotional state in an-
cial prescriptions of appropriate
other person; and allow employersfeminine
to activities, and, on average,
control (at least to some extent) the women spend more time in these
emotional activities of workers.' She activities than men (Bellas and
considered the occupation of profes- Toutkoushian Forthcoming). Teach-
sor to require substantial amounts of ing and service clearly involve sub-
emotional labor. Clearly, professors stantial amounts of emotional la-
have face-to-face or voice-to-voice bor-labor that is generally not
contact with students, colleagues, viewed
ad- as involving valuable skills
ministrators, staff, and, at times,
andthe
is consequently poorly rewarded.
As a result, teaching "is either a
public. Professors often try to elicit
emotions in people with whomnegative
they factor in compensation
interact, which involves managing
or . .. unrelated to compensation"
their own emotional expression.(Fairweather
Al- 1993, 64; see also Bel-
though professors have considerable
las 1994). As professors recognize,
autonomy, administrators exert there are also few rewards for service
some control over their emotional ac- (Fairweather 1993).
tivities, for example, by assessing In contrast, research and admini-
performance with evaluations by stration are culturally defined as
students and colleagues. Accordingmasculine activities, and, in the ag-
to Hochschild (1983), emotional laborgregate, men spend more time in
involves following certain prescrip- these activities (Bellas and
tions or "feeling rules." ProfessorsToutkoushian Forthcoming). A
learn these feeling rules through pro-though research and administra
fessional socialization and explicit also require substantial amount
organizational or occupational codes emotional labor, it is typically m
of conduct. Those who do not may be mized or overlooked while other
subject to poor evaluations, informalmore highly rewarded skills are em
or formal sanctions, and, in extremephasized. Studies of faculty salar
cases, termination from invariably show that higher num
employment. bers of publications and holding
In this article, I examine the ac- administrative position contribute
tivities in which professors engage higher salaries (Bellas 1994; Fair-
and the emotional labor required by weather 1993). Thus, as Feldberg

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
98 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

(1984) recognizes, "faroriented)

from institutions
being(Statham,
an
Richardson,
objective fact, skill is often and anCook 1991).
ideo-
logical category imposed on certain
types of work by virtue of the
Emotional sex
labor in and
the classroom
power of the workers who perform it"
(322). An award-winning teacher and
former editor of Teaching Sociology,
sociologist Kathleen McKinney
EMOTIONAL LABOR (1988) suggests that one of the five
AND TEACHING
components of quality teaching is en-
tertainment. She advises professors
Both teaching and mothering en- your enjoyment and enter-
to "show
tail social expectations of nurtur- tain your students through impres-
ance, altruism, and self-abnegation sion management techniques. Show
(Acker 1995; Grumet 1988). Al- a sense of humor, wear diverse and
though the conflation between teach- visually interesting clothes, alter
ing and mothering lessens as the age your vocabulary, and make use of
of the students and the likelihood paralanguage and nonverbal behav-
that teachers will be male increase, iorsit(gestures, facial expressions,
is apparent to some extent through- body movement, eye contact)" (300).
out the education system. As at other In other words, put on a show. Being
levels, postsecondary teaching knowledgeable
in- about one's subject
volves far more than simply impart- matter is not enough; professors
ing knowledge. Professors help must stu- convey that knowledge. Main-
dents mature intellectually and taining student interest and motiva-
emotionally; they motivate and tion is crucial to accomplishing this
stimulate student interest. In short, task. Professors are, in effect, on
professors nurture young minds. stage and required to perform
Despite the skills involved in effec-whether they feel like it at the time
tive teaching, like so much of so- or not.
called women's work teaching ap- One's orientation to teaching and
pears to draw on natural abilities. repertoire of communication and hu-
Most colleges and universities do not man relations skills undoubtedly
offer on-the-job training for profes-mediate the classroom experience
sors, or, if they do, the amount of re-and demands for emotional labor.
sources used pales in comparison to Professors who thrive on teaching
those devoted to research (Rau and may not feel that they are acting or
Baker 1989). Professors who improve performing at all. It may be invigo-
their teaching tend to do so through rating and genuinely elicit positive
trial and error and feedback from emotions. For those less oriented to-
students. While discussions about ward teaching, however, the task
teaching techniques may be common
may entail "surface acting" (pretend-
at some types of institutions, they
ing to hold certain feelings) or "deep
are infrequent at the more pres-
acting" (conjuring feelings up so that
tigious (that is, more research- the actor in fact experiences them)

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 99

(Hochschild 1983). The extent to Brooks [1982]). Women tend to view

classroom interaction as a means of
which either kind of acting is emo-
helping students become independ-
tionally draining or results in feel-
ings of alienation from self probablyent thinkers and to see this as an im-
portant goal. In contrast, men tend
depends on the extent of one's identi-
fication with teaching, as well as "to regard students' participation as
other personality factors. Emotional a requirement or sometimes as a
labor need not be a negative experi- time waste" (Statham, Richardson,
ence, as Hochschild suggested, but and Cook 1991, 126). Students ap-
may be moderated by individual and pear to expect and reward such gen-
work characteristics (Wharton 1993; dered behavior. Students reward fe-
Stenross and Kleinman 1989; male professors, but sanction male
Rafaeli and Sutton 1987). professors, for exhibiting interactive
The association between teachingbehavior (Basow 1995; Statham,
and mothering and the lower statusRichardson, and Cook 1991; Kier-
and authority of women may causestead, D'Agostino, and Dill 1988;
male and female professors to experi- Bennett 1982).
ence emotional labor in the class- Male professors are less likely
room quite differently. The extent thantofemales to relate personal expe-
which gender differences in profes- riences in the classroom, and, when
sors' behavior and orientation reflect they do, their self-revelations tend to
different socialization experiences be less personal (for example, offer-
versus conformity to organizational ing information about their careers
and work role standards and expec- rather than their families). Female
tations is unclear. Both can create professors are also more likely than
pressures for female professors, malesinto exhibit warm, reinforcing
particular, not only to perform behavior
en- in the classroom. Not sur-
prisingly, students expect female
thusiastically but to exhibit friendly,
caring behaviors, and they appear to
professors to be nicer than male pro-
be more likely to do so (Statham, fessors and judge them more harshly
Richardson, and Cook 1991). Women when they are not. Kierstead,
are more likely than men to interact D'Agostino, and Dill (1988) found
with students in the classroom-to that friendly behavior elevated stu-
pose questions, encourage students dents' ratings of women but had no
to ask questions, mediate discus- effect for men.
sions, and encourage passive stu- Women are far more likely than
dents while curbing overbearing men to report that students evaluate
ones.2 them on their personalities
Women also tend to be more con- (Statham, Richardson, and Cook
cerned than men with student learn- 1991; see also Martin 1984). Remi-
ing, rather than with teaching per seniscent of Hochschild's interviews
(Statham, Richardson, and Cook with flight attendants (1983), female
1991). Consequently, women allow professors report that students criti-
students to speak significantly morecize them for "not smiling enough,"
than men (twice as long, according tofor being "dull" or "unexciting"

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
100 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

(Statham, Richardson, and Cook Diffusing volatile situations

1991, 110-11). Thus women are more clearly requires interpersonal skills
engaged with students in the class- such as humor and tact. Sometimes
room and engaged at a more personal professors can anticipate hostile re-
level, one that may require greater actions, as when handing back a set
investments in emotional labor. In- of poor exams, but at other times
terestingly, Statham, Richardson, tempers may flair unexpectedly,
and Cook (1991) found that men and
compounding the stress of teaching.
women do not appear to experience The risk of unexpected "eruptions" is
teaching in the same way. Female probably greater in such courses as
professors "frequently mention the women's studies and ethnic studies,
emotional consequences of dedicated which women are more likely to
teaching in terms of their feelings ofteach than men (Astin, Korn, and
well-being or depression. Dedicated Dey 1991). Even when women and
males, on the other hand, focus men teach the same course, students
on teaching as a technical prob- may be more resistant to the mes-
lem" (48). sage of women professors (Moore
Not only must professors display 1997). In addition, men are twice as
positive emotions, but they must also likely as women to have graduate
work to control negative emo- teaching assistants (Astin, Korn, and
tions-both their own and their stu- Dey 1991), who can serve as "emo-
dents'. At times, professors are ex- tional shields," deflecting student
pected to exhibit neutrality, forhostility. In addition, dealing with an
irate (male) student may be far more
example, in treating students equita-
bly. Like other professionals, such unsettling
as for female than for male
paralegals (Pierce 1995), detectivesprofessors because of the level of vio-
(Stenross and Kleinman 1989), lence against women in our society.
salespersons (Leidner 1993), and bill Women's lower social status may
collectors (Hochschild 1983; Rafaeli result in a weaker "status shield" for
and Sutton 1991), professors must female
at professors (Hochschild 1983).
times suppress their negative (or Women are less protected from af-
positive) feelings toward students fronts to their authority, even when
and avoid displays of impatience, in the same occupational position as
annoyance, and even anger. When men. Students tend to rate female
students do not take their studies se- professors as less knowledgeable
riously, are rude, or confront profes- than their male counterparts (Feld-
sors' belief systems, professors must man 1993) and appear to demand a
control their frustration and hostil- higher standard of preparation from
ity. While occasional displays ofthem
an- (Bennett 1982). Brooks (1982)
noyance may be effective in gettingfound significant differences in the
students to toe the line, aggressiveness of male graduate stu-
professors-particularly women- dents toward female professors rela-
cannot display real anger withouttive to male professors. She suggests
negative repercussions, if only on that some male graduate students
student evaluations. have difficulty dealing with profes-

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 101

sional women who exhibit character- to deal with those kinds of problems,
istics that are culturally defined as
I'm not comfortable dealing with
male, such as self-confidence, asser-
that" (96). Another male professor re-
tiveness, and ambition. Thus women ported that he responds to students'
attempts to discuss personal matters
have the difficult task of establishing
their authority and reducing op- by saying, "I have to do some other
portunities for students to challenge things. I have other things to do and
it, while at the same time establish- you'll have to excuse me" (96). In con-
ing a warm, interactive classroom trast, women are less likely to cut
environment. students' time in their office short.
One female professor in the same
Emotional labor study lamented that "all the students
that have ever had nervous break-
outside the classroom
downs in this place have had them in
Since cultural expectations dic-[her] office" (95).
tate that women be polite and listen Despite evidence to the contrary,
students
to other people's problems, students rate their female professors
as
may expect such behavior of their fe-being less available than men.
male professors outside the class-Furthermore, Bennett (1982) found a
room. Some female professors relationship between amount of per-
complain that students expect sonal contact and student satisfac-
tion for female professors but not for
hand-holding or mothering, which
males, indicating that women are pe-
they may or may not have the time,
inclination, or emotional energy nalized
to if they do not meet students'
expectations for personal contact.
provide. Although most professors
recognize that personal problems can This is consistent with DeVault's ob-
influence classroom performanceservation (1991) that "caring work is
and many believe that students de- exceptional or optional for men while
serve to be heard, there is also a per-is obligatory for women" (151). The
it
ception that students value male pro-extent to which professors should lis-
fessors' time more than female ten to their students' personal prob-
lems is less at issue than the conse-
professors' (Tierney and Bensimon
1996). quences of gender differences in
professors' behavior and the toll
Men and women may send differ-
ent messages to students aboutwomen's
their behavior may take on their
willingness to listen to personal emotions and time when they expend
problems. Statham, Richardson, and so much of both on activities that are
Cook (1991) found that men tend to little recognized or financially
avoid counseling students and dis- rewarded.
courage students from conveying
personal problems. One male profes- EMOTIONAL LABOR AND SERVICE
sor explained his strategy: "If they
begin to talk about personal prob- Service, a catchall category that
lems, I tell them that I am not trained typically encompasses everything

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
102 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

Student advising
that is not clearly teaching or re-
search, includes activities both inter-
nal and external to the institution Student advising is quite similar
(Blackburn and Lawrence 1995). to interacting with one's own stu-
dents outside the classroom. Seldin's
Student advising and committee
work are the most common forms of discussion of what constitutes a good
adviser (1980) points to the emo-
internal service performed by faculty,
tional labor involved in this en-
and I discuss some of the emotional
deavor. In addition to verbal and non-
labor required in these activities
verbal communication skills and
later. Professors may also engage in
public relations work for their college
knowledge about the curriculum,
or university. Favorable personal in- stipulates that advisers should ha
teractions between faculty and stu- a "genuine interest in working w
dents, parents, alumni, potential do- students ..., the ability to deal w
students as individuals and human
nors, legislators, and other
beings..., empathy, warmth, intui-
constituents help "sell the institu-
tion"; can increase student enroll- and flexibility, the patience to
tion
listen ..., and the ability to give as
ment, retention, and financial contri-
much time as necessary to counsel
butions; and can improve community
students [who may be frustrated and
relations.3 External service typically
angry] on courses, careers, and per-
involves public service; professional
sonal problems" (121).
activities, such as reviewing manu-
scripts for journals; and serving asIn
anview of the requirements Seldin
describes, it is not surprising that
officer or com- mittee member for
professional organizations. women spend more hours per week
advising
Studies of faculty time expendi- students than do men (As
tin,
tures show that, in the aggregate, Korn, and Dey 1991). Statham,
Richardson, and Cook (1991) found
women spend more time in service
work than men (Bellas and that male university professors are
Toutkoushian Forthcoming). Like more likely than female professors to
view interactions with students out-
teaching, service appears to require
no special training (Seldin 1980). Al- side the classroom negatively. Conse-
though service is often routine, little quently, women may appear more
noticed, and unrewarded, it can be an welcoming to students and more will-
important means of networking, fa- ing to listen to their concerns. To cre-
cilitating research, and otherwise en- ate a positive experience for stu-
hancing one's career (Lawson 1990). dents, professors may need to engage
Service activities can also be a route in deep acting or surface acting, un-
to higher status for faculty (for exam-less feelings and emotions are genu-
ine (Hochschild 1983).
ple, by attaining visibility within in-
stitutions) and higher salaries (for
example, by leading to an adminis-Committee work
trative position).
Serving on committees requires
both communication skills (for exam-

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 103

ple, the ability to convey

and agreeable." ideas
They argue that suc
cinctly and clearly) and human
"male dominated rela-
cultures encourage
tions skills (for feminine example, stereotypicaldiplomac
behaviors
and sociability). that The make degree of emo
women appear 'unob-
tional labor required will and
jectionable,' congenial varycheerfulde-
pending on the charge rather than of the
strident commit
and unpredict-
tee, the issues involved, committee able" (83).4 As in teaching, women
composition, and the level of consen- may be expected to exhibit facial dis-
sus among members. Norms dictate plays of emotion to a greater extent
that professors should act profes- than men to convey a pleasant and
sionally in committee meetings and agreeable demeanor (Hochschild
while conducting related work. Act- 1983). While untenured faculty,
ing professionally may require one to among whom women are dispropor-
control negative emotions and ex- tionately represented, are at greatest
press positive ones (or, at a mini- risk if they do not conform to gen-
mum, exhibit cordiality) and to show dered expectations, tenured faculty
respect for differences of opinion, are also vulnerable since promotions
whether or not this reflects one's true and merit increases require review
feelings. Seldin (1980) suggests that by colleagues and department heads
evaluations of faculty service should (Johnsrud 1993).
include the dimensions of "faculty re- In general, women are disadvan-
lations" as well as a "cooperative atti- taged in mixed-sex groups. Structur-
tude": "Is the faculty member always ally, men are more likely to hold
civil toward his [sic] colleagues? To- higher ranks and administrative
ward others? Does he show respect posts and therefore be in positions to
for differing opinions? Is he coopera- evaluate, reward, and punish
tive? Does he offer department peers women. This may place greater de-
help with their problems? Does he mands for emotional labor on women
appear interested and pleased to as women attempt to convey, justify,
carry out assignments? Is he positive and legitimize their contributions
and forward-looking? Responsive to and, indeed, their presence. Men's
others' needs?" (126; see also Black- communication styles are associated
burn and Lawrence 1995, 226). with power and professionalism,
This emphasis on collegiality while women's styles are associated
raises the questions of whether dif- with weakness (Tannen 1994). Men's
ferent behaviors are expected of the deeper voices and larger size contrib-
sexes, and whether men's and ute to these perceptions, as well as
women's interpersonal styles and their tendency to speak more, inter-
their contributions to committees are rupt more, and control the topic of
judged differently. Tierney and conversation. Women's comments
Bensimon (1996) refer to women's ef- and suggestions tend not to be ac-
forts to fit into patriarchal work set- corded the same weight as men's
tings as doing "smile work"-the (Sandler 1992; Henley and Freeman
"symbolic management of behavior1989). Some women faculty and ad-
to present oneself as being pleasingministrators report that they may go

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
104 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

unrecognized in meetings, Scientists,

be including
inter- social scien-
rupted, or have their comments
tists, ig-
are trained to suppress emo-
nored or dismissed. To have their tions and, when necessary, to ma-
ideas heard or motions passed, nipulate emotions in subjects so as to
women may have to find a man to obtain their cooperation. Consider
present them (Olsen, Maple, and examples in the popular textbook
Stage 1995; Sandler 1992). Ironically,The Practice of Social Research, by
although women's communication Earl Babbie (1995). When research
styles are devalued, if women adopt a requires direct interchange between
more masculine style they risk being researcher and subject, the inter-
viewed as overly aggressive, insensi- viewer should be a "neutral medium
tive, or even uncollegial. All this maythrough which questions and an-
place additional demands for emo- swers are transmitted" (264, italics
tional labor on faculty women, espe- in original). Interviewers should not
cially women in the lower ranks and display emotions even when respon-
women of color, who may suffer de- dents do. Interviewers strive for neu-
valuation in interactive as well as fi-
trality by following a script, since
nancial contexts.
changes in wording may influence
what they are trying to find out from
EMOTIONAL LABOR those they are studying. The inter-
AND RESEARCH viewer should "become the kind of
person the respondent is comfortable
At first glance, research appears with" since respondents "deserve the
to involve little emotional labor rela- most enjoyable experience the re-
tive to teaching and service. This per- searcher and interviewer can pro-
ception stems from the strong asso-vide" (266). Babbie also emphasizes
ciation between science and good listening skills; the interviewer
objectivity, as well as theshould view "be that
more interested than in-
emotions are an impediment or con-
teresting" (290). Clearly, a substan-
taminant to the scientific process
tial element of impression manage-
(Jayaratne and Stewart 1991; ment is evident in these interviewing
Oakley 1981; Smith 1974). The polar-
techniques.
ity between "objective science" andDespite the emphasis on emo-
"subjective emotions" parallels gen-
tional detachment and neutrality, re-
der stereotypes. searchers can become deeply in-
volved in their subjects' lives,
Women are characterised as sensitive, particularly
in- when there is sustained
tuitive, incapable of objectivity and emo-
contact between researchers and
tional detachment and as immersed in
subjects. As Marie Corbin (1971)
the business of making and sustaining
described:
personal relationships. Men are thought
superior through their capacity for ra-
tionality and scientific objectivity andIn theory it should be possible to estab-
are thus seen to be possessed of an instru-
lish confidence simply by courtesy to-
mental orientation in their relationships
wards and interest in the interviewees.
with others. (Oakley 1981, 38) In practice it can be difficult to spend

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 105

eight hours in a person's home,

observation are share
most prevalent in
their meals and listen tosciences
the social their problems
and the humani-
and at the same time remain polite, de-
ties, and it is precisely these methods
tached and largely uncommunicative.
that researchers employ in the study
(Reported in Oakley 1981, 53)
of emotional labor (for example,
Pierce 1995; Leidner 1993; DeVault
Neutrality may be especially diffi-
1991; Hochschild 1983). Yet quanti-
cult when the research topic is emo-
tative methods such as analysis of
tionally charged or related to one's
secondary data and controlled ex-
personal experiences. For example,
periments (also prevalent in the so-
sociologist Becky Thompson (1990) cial sciences but most characteristic
conveys the following regarding her
of the physical sciences) are not to-
response while interviewing women
tally devoid of emotion.5 Professors
with eating disorders: "I sometimes
are typically invested in their re-
found myself trying to escape from
search and must manage their emo-
the pain of their stories as they
tions regarding the interpretation
spoke. Many of the women have been
and potential impact of their find-
multiply victimized including endur-
ings. Thus emotional detachment, so
ing poverty, sexual abuse, exposure
often associated with quantitative
to high levels of violence, and emo-
methods, may in reality be deep
tional and physical torture." She said
acting--and a convenient way of dis-
this often left her completely drained
tancing oneself from emotional
after the interviews. Sociologist issues.
Barbara Katz Rothman (1986) de-
Other aspects of research,
scribes her study of women who un-
whether qualitative or quantitative,
derwent amniocentesis to diagnose
involve emotional labor. Professors
fetal abnormalities: "It was like lift-
may have research assistants, with
ing the proverbial rock and having it
whom they must communicate. Pro-
all crawl out-ugliness, pain, grief,
fessors must provide instructions
horror, anger, anguish, fear, sad-
and training and be concerned with
ness .... It was a nightmare." These
issues of morale and motivation. Col-
are but two of the examples cited in
Feminist Methods in Social Research
laboration and coauthorship involve
communication and interpersonal
by Shulamit Reinharz (1992, 34-36).
skills, too. However, collaboration,
These examples demonstrate that
thought to be more common among
the interview experience can elicit
women than men, conflicts with the
powerful emotions both in the inter- normative view of science as an
viewee and the researcher. Yet social
autonomous pursuit (Ward and
scientists largely ignore the emo-Grant 1991). Collaborative efforts
tional aspects of the research process
may require more emotional labor
or learn to minimize and even deny
than does individual work but are
them by becoming mere "tools" or "in-
likely to be accorded less value, with
struments" (Oakley 1981, 32).
negative consequences for women.
Qualitative methods such as in-
Professional conferences also re-
terviews, fieldwork, and participant-
quire emotional labor. Like teachers,

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
106 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

creating
presenters of papers are on different
stage, butand perhaps
the stakes are generally higher.
greater demands A
for emotional labor
poor professional presentation on women. may
have negative consequences Although for administration
one's i
reputation. Authors must somecommuni-
solitary activities such
cate clearly, suppress any fear
paring budgets or and reports
anxiety, and elicit positive typically emotions
involves supervising
from their audience. Professional dinates and reporting to p
conferences also provide an opportu- higher positions. Thus com
nity for networking and self- tion skills and human relations skills
promotion. Due to differences in gen-
are paramount, though these are
der socialization, self-promotionalgenerally valued less than strong
behavior is thought to be easier forleadership abilities. Although women
most men than for most women and administrators may be more adept
may be better received by others if than
it men at interpersonal relations,
comes from men (McIlwee and Rob- they are nevertheless most likely dis-
inson 1992). Thus, contrary to the im-advantaged in their interpersonal in-
age of research and publishing as re- teractions since gender role expecta-
quiring little if any emotional labor, tions can influence interactions with
scholarly activities involve both emo- students, colleagues, and the public.
tional labor and intellectual labor, The style of women administra-
though the latter is recognized andtors, like that of women professors,
rewarded far more than the former.6 appears to be more inclusive and
egalitarian than men's, but such ten-
ADMINISTRATION dencies are frequently interpreted as
a sign of weakness (Tannen 1994).
The role of faculty in administra-
Similarly, women's less forceful pre-
tion has received little research at-
sentation styles, along with their
tention, although studies show that
higher voices and smaller physical
men are far more likely to serve size,
in tend to be judged less appropri-
administrative positions than ate than more masculine character-
women, particularly in the upper istics (Sandler 1992; Henley and
echelons (Kaplan and Tinsley 1989;
Freeman 1989). This may have nega-
Chamberlain 1988). This is not sur- tive consequences for women's effec-
prising given the strong association tiveness in the job. Yet, as noted pre-
in people's minds between leadership viously, if women assume more
characteristics and masculine attrib- masculine styles, they are likely to be
utes. Because the mental image of sanctioned
a for deviating from
leader is male, people may find it in-gender-appropriate behavior. As
congruous for a woman to be an ad- Sandler (1986) observes, "We are not
ministrator (Sandler 1986). As dis- surprised when men are powerful,
cussed in the section on committee assertive, ambitious, and achieving,
work, the behavior of female admin- but we may be uncomfortable when
istrators may be judged differently women exhibit these traits . . . we
from males' even when it is the same,
'expect' women to be nurturing, pas-

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 107

sive, accommodating" (4). Thus tial amounts of emotional labor but

women administrators, like women are generally not seen as involving
faculty and other professional valued skills and are consequently
women generally, appear to face apoorly rewarded. In contrast, re-
double bind. Women are expected search
to and administration are asso-
be nice and accommodating, but ifciated with traits culturally defined
they are too nice, they are not re-
as masculine, and, on average, men
spected. These problems may inter-
spend more time in these activities
(Bellas and Toutkoushian Forth-
fere with the ability of women admin-
istrators to carry out their work coming). Although I have suggeste
effectively, and they may even con- that research and administration
tribute to a self-fulfilling prophecy. also involve emotional labor, their
emotional aspects tend to be largely
CONCLUSION ignored, while intellectual, technical,
and leadership skills are emphasized
Research demonstrates thatand highly compensated. Aside from
gen-
dered reward structures can arise differences in the propensity of
women and men to engage in differ-
when specific job tasks are valued
ent activities and the gendered re-
more or less because of the gendered
nature of the work. Skills and re- ward structure associated with these
activities, even when the tasks are
sponsibilities defined as feminine,
the same, the type and intensity of
such as nurturance and face-to-face
emotional labor required of the sexes
service to clients or customers (emo-
tional labor), are typically unappreci- differ.
may
ated and unrewarded by employers
and stigmatized even when male
workers perform them. In contrast, Notes

employers tend to appreciate and re- 1. Although Hochschild defined emotional

ward skills and responsibilities de- labor as involving situations where employees
fined as masculine, such as technical have face-to-face or voice-to-voice contact with
expertise and management responsi- the public, others have expanded this concep-
bilities (England et al. 1994; Stein- tualization to include interaction with cowork-
ers (for example, Rafaeli 1989).
berg 1990; Feldberg 1984). 2. An interesting study by Canada and
Most professors divide their time Pringle (1995) found that interactive behav-
between teaching, research, service,iors on the part of both female and male profes-
and, for some, administration. As in sors are sensitive to the sex composition of
the nonacademic labor market, there classes. Female and male professors initiated
comparable numbers of interactions in all-
is a gendered reward structure in
female classrooms, but female professors initi-
academia. Teaching and service are ated more and male professors fewer interac-
most closely aligned with character- tions in mixed-sex classrooms. In addition, the
istics and behaviors culturally de-more male students, the fewer the number of
fined as feminine, and, in the aggre-professor (and student) interactions.
3. Institutional promises of quality
gate, women spend more time in faculty-student interactions in their recruit-
these activities than men. Teaching ment materials may influence student expec-
and service clearly involve substan- tations for personal contact with professors.

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
108 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

4. Gendered expectations Bennett,

may extend
Sheilabe-
Kishler. 1982. Student
yond smile work, of course, toPerceptions
include serving
of and Expectations fo
as secretary for committees Male
or performing
and Female Instructors: Evi-
wifely duties such as making coffee or cleaning
dence Relating to the Question of Gen-
up after meetings (Sandler 1992). These ac-
tivities all constitute "doing gender" (West and der Bias in Teaching Evaluation.
Zimmerman 1987). Journal of Educational Psychology
5. Note that women faculty and women stu- 74(2):170-79.
dents are concentrated in fields where expec-Blackburn, Robert T. and Janet H. Law-
tations for emotional labor and expression are rence. 1995. Faculty at Work. Balti-
greatest (such as the humanities, social work, more, MD: Johns Hopkins University
and education), while men are concentrated in Press.
presumably unemotional fields (such as engi-
Brooks, Virginia. 1982. Sex Differences in
neering and physics).
Student Dominance Behavior in Fe-
6. Written communications may also in-
male and Male Professors' Class-
volve emotional labor; examples of such com-
munications are responses to journal review- rooms. Sex Roles 8(7):683-90.
ers' comments and exchanges between Canada, Katherine and Richard Pringle.
authors who disagree. 1995. The Role of Gender in College
Classroom Interactions: A Social Con-
text Approach. Sociology ofEducation
References
68(3): 161-86.
Chamberlain,
Acker, Sandra. 1995. Carry on Caring: Marian K. 1988. Women in
The Work of Women Teachers. British Academe: Progress and Prospects.
Journal of Sociology of Education New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
16(1):21-36. Corbin, Marie. 1971. Appendix 3. In Man-
Astin, Alexander, William S. Korn, and agers and Their Wives, by Jan M. Pahl
Eric L. Dey. 1991. The American Col- and Raymond E. Pahl. London: Allen
Lane.
lege Teacher: National Norms for the
1989-90 HERIFaculty Survey. Los An- DeVault, Marjorie L. 1991. Feeding the
geles: University of California at Los Family: The Social Organization of
Angeles, Graduate School of Educa- Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago:
tion, Higher Education Research In- University of Chicago Press.
stitute. England, Paula, Melissa S. Herbert, Bar-
Babbie, Earl. 1995. The Practice of Social bara Stanek Kilbourne, Lori L. Reid,
Research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. and Lori McCreary Megdal. 1994. The
Basow, Susan A. 1995. Student Evalua- Gendered Valuation of Occupations
tions of College Professors: When Gen- and Skills: Earnings in 1980 Census
der Matters. Journal of Educational Occupations. Social Forces 73(1):65-
Psychology 87(4):656-65. 99.

Bellas, Marcia L. 1994. Comparable Fairweather, James S. 1993. Academic

Worth in Academe: The Effects on Fac-
ulty Salaries of the Sex Composition of Higher Education 17(1):43-68.
and Labor-Market Conditions of Aca-
demic Disciplines. American Socio-
logical Review 59(6):807-21.
Bellas, Marcia L. and Robert K.
Toutkoushian. Faculty Time Alloca-
tions and Research Productivity:
der, Race and Family Effects. Forth-
coming Review of Higher Education.
Values and Faculty Rewards. Review
Feldberg, Roslyn L. 1984. Comparable
Worth: Toward Theory and Practice in
the United States. Signs: Journal of
Women in Culture and Society
10(2):311-28.
Gen- Kenneth A. 1993. College Stu-
Feldman,
dents' Views of Male and Female Col-
lege Teachers: Part II-Evidence from

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EMOTIONAL LABOR IN ACADEMIA 109

Students' Evaluations of Their Class-Martin, Elaine. 1984. Power and Author-

room Teachers. Research in Higher ity in the Classroom: Sexist Stereo-
Education 34(2):151-211. types in Teaching Evaluations. Signs:
Grumet, Madeline R. 1988. Bitter Milk: Journal of Women in Culture and So-
Women and Teaching. Amherst: Uni- ciety 9(3):482-92.
versity of Massachusetts Press. McIlwee, Judith S. and J. Gregg Robin-
Henley, Nancy and Jo Freeman. 1989. son. 1992. Women in Engineering:
The Sexual Politics of Interpersonal Gender, Power, and Workplace Culture.
Behavior. In Women: A Feminist Per- Albany: State University of New York
spective, ed. Jo Freeman. Mountain Press.
View, CA: Mayfield. McKinney, Kathleen. 1988. Faces: Five
Hochschild, Arlie Russell. 1983. The Components of Quality Teaching.
Managed Heart: Commercialization ofTeaching Sociology 16(3):298-301.
Human Feeling. Berkeley: University Moore, Melanie. 1997. Student Resis-
of California Press. tance to Course Content: Reactions to
Jayaratne, Toby Epstein and Abigail J. the Gender of the Messenger. Teach-
Stewart. 1991. Quantitative and ing Sociology 25(2):128-33.
Qualitative Methods in the Social Sci-
Oakley, Ann. 1981. Interviewing Women:
ences: Current Feminist Issues and A Contradiction in Terms. In Doing
Practical Strategies. In Beyond Meth-
Feminist Research, ed. Helen Roberts.
odology: Feminist Scholarship as London: Routledge.
Lived Research, ed. Mary Margaret Olsen, Deborah, Sue A. Maple, and
Fonow and Judith A. Cook. Blooming- Frances K. Stage. 1995. Women and
ton: Indiana University Press. Minority Faculty Job Satisfaction:
Johnsrud, Linda K. 1993. Women and Mi- Professional Role Interests, Profes-
nority Faculty Experiences: Defining sional Satisfactions, and Institutional
and Responding to Diverse Realities. Fit. Journal of Higher Education
In Building a Diverse Faculty, ed. Jo- 66(3):267-93.
anne Gainen and Robert Boice. Vol. 53. Pierce, Jennifer L. 1995. Gender Trials:
New Directions for Teaching and Emotional Lives in Contemporary
Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Law Firms. Berkeley: University of
Bass. California Press.
Kaplan, Sheila and Adrian Tinsley. 1989.
Rafaeli, Anat. 1989. When Cashiers
The Unfinished Agenda: Women in Meet Customers: An Analysis of the
Higher Education Administration. Role of Supermarket Cashiers. Acad-
Academe, Jan.-Feb.:18-22. emy of Management Review
Kierstead, Diane, Patti D'Agostino, and 32(2):245-73.
Heidi Dill. 1988. Sex Role Stereotyp- Rafaeli, Anat and Robert I. Sutton. 1987.
ing of College Professors: Bias in Stu- Expression of Emotion as Part of the
dents' Ratings of Instructors. Journal of Work Role. Academy of Management
Educational Psychology 80(3):342-44. Review 12(1):23-37.
Lawson, Hal A. 1990. Constraints on the - . 1991. Emotional Contrast Strate-
Professional Service of Education Fac- gies as Means of Social Interest: Les-
ulty. Journal of Teacher Education sons from Criminal Interrogators and
41(4):57-70. Bill Collectors. Academy of Manage-
Leidner, Robin. 1993. Fast Food, Fast ment Journal 34(4):749-75.
Talk: Service Work and the Routiniza- Rau, William and Paul J. Baker. 1989.
tion of Everyday Life. Berkeley: Uni- The Organized Contradictions of Aca-
versity of California Press. deme: Barriers Facing the Next Aca-

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
110 THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY

demic Revolution. Teaching Stenross, Barbara

Sociology and Sherryl Klein-
17(Apr.): 161-75. man. 1989. The Highs and Lows of
Reinharz, Shulamit. 1992. Feminist Emotional Labor: Detectives' Encoun-
Methods in Social Research. New ters with Criminals and Victims. Jour-
York: Oxford University Press. nal of Contemporary Ethnography
Rothman, Barbara Katz. 1986. Reflec- 17(4):435-52.
tions on Hard Work. Qualitative Soci- Tannen, Deborah. 1994. Talking from 9 to
ology 9(1):48-53. 5: How Women's and Men's Conversa-
Sandler, Bernice Resnick. 1986. The tional Styles Affect Who Gets Heard,
Campus Climate Revisited: Chilly for Who Gets Credit, and What Gets Done
Women Faculty, Administrators, and at Work. New York: William Morrow.
Graduate Students. Washington, DC:
Thompson, Becky. 1990. Raisins and
Association of American Colleges, Pro- Smiles for Me and My Sister: A Femi-
ject on the Status and Education of nist Theory of Eating Problems,
Women. Trauma, and Recovery in Women's
. 1992. Success and Survival Lives. Ph.D. diss., Brandeis University.
Strategies for Women Faculty Tierney,
Mem- William G. and Estela Mara
bers. Washington, DC: Association of 1996. Promotion and Ten-
Bensimon.
American Colleges. ure: Community and Socialization in
Seldin, Peter. 1980. Successful Faculty Academe. Albany: State University of
Evaluation Programs: A Practical New York Press.
Guide to Improve Faculty PerformanceWard, Kathryn B. and Linda Grant. 1991.
and Promotion/Tenure Decisions. Co-authorship, Gender, and Publica-
Crugers, NY: Coventry Press. tion Among Sociologists. In Beyond
Smith, Dorothy E. 1974. Women's Methodology:Per- Feminist Scholarship as
spective as a Radical Critique of Soci- Lived Research, ed. Mary Margaret
ology. Sociological Inquiry 44(1):7-13. Fonow and Judith A. Cook. Blooming-
Statham, Anne, Laurel Richardson,ton: and Indiana University Press.
Judith A. Cook. 1991. Gender and Uni- West, Candace and Don H. Zimmerman.
versity Teaching: A Negotiated Differ- 1987. Doing Gender. Gender & Society
ence. Albany: State University of New 1(2):125-51.
York Press. Wharton, Amy S. 1993. The Affective
Steinberg, Ronnie J. 1990. Social Con- Consequences of Service Work: Man-
struction of Skill: Gender, Power, and aging Emotions on the Job. Work and
Comparable Worth. Work and Occupa- Occupations 20(2):205-32.
tions 17(4):449-82.

This content downloaded from

78.22.235.218 on Fri, 08 Mar 2024 10:46:47 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms