中文导读 爱荷华大学 Tippie 商学院于2026年10月14日介绍一项发表于《Journal of Organizational Behavior》的研究：在团队中被看作爱传闲话的人，能力与领导潜力评分更低；男性受到的负面评价往往重于做出同样行为的女性。本文说明刻板印象如何影响判断、研究方法，以及对扁平化组织选人的含义。
正文 Office gossip is often treated as a small social habit . A new study , covered by the University of Iowa Tippie College of Business on October 14, 2026, suggests it can reshape how colleagues judge ability . Men who were seen as frequent gossipers received lower ratings of job competence and leadership potential than women who gossiped in similar ways . Women were also penalized , the authors say , but the cost was smaller .
本段译文 职场闲话常被当作无关紧要的社交习惯。爱荷华大学 Tippie 商学院于2026年10月14日报道的一项新研究提示：它可能改变同事如何判断一个人的能力。被视为经常传闲话的男性，在工作能力与领导潜力上的评分，低于以类似方式传闲话的女性。作者称，女性也会受到惩罚，但代价更小。
Trevor Spoelma , an associate professor of management and entrepreneurship and a co-author of the paper , links the pattern to gender stereotypes . Society often treats gossip as something women do . When a woman shares workplace talk , people may react with less surprise . Men , by contrast , are expected to stay focused on tasks and promotion . Breaking that expectation , Spoelma argues , makes male gossipers look less competent and less ready to lead . Stereotypes , he notes influence both behavior and how others respond to it .
本段译文 论文共同作者、管理与创业学副教授 Trevor Spoelma 将这一模式与性别刻板印象联系起来。社会往往把闲话视为女性会做的事。当女性分享职场谈话时，人们可能较少感到意外。相比之下，男性被期待专注于任务与晋升。Spoelma 认为，打破这一期待会使爱传闲话的男性显得能力更弱、更不适合领导。他指出，刻板印象既影响行为本身，也影响他人如何回应这种行为。
The researchers also note that gossip is not always harmful Positive talk can reinforce helpful group behavior warn teammates about real problems , or reduce social loafing . Earlier work by Spoelma and Andrea Hetrick had already shown that favorable talk about absent colleagues can support team performance . Trouble grows when people use private talk to criticize others unfairly or question their skills without evidence . In those cases , team trust and cohesiveness can suffer
本段译文 研究者还指出，闲话并非总是有害。正面的谈论可以强化有益的群体行为、提醒队友注意真实问题，或减少社会惰化。Spoelma 与 Andrea Hetrick 早前的研究已显示，对不在场同事的正面谈论可能支持团队表现。当人们用私下谈话不公正地批评他人，或在没有证据时质疑其技能时，麻烦就会扩大。在这些情况下，团队信任与凝聚力可能受损。
To test the gender difference , the team ran three studies . One followed 272 undergraduate students in five-person class project teams across a semester . Students first reported negative gossip among teammates ; weeks later , they rated one another’s competence and leadership . Two further online experiments with about 450 U .S . workers confirmed a consistent pattern : gossipers were rated lower overall , and men were docked more heavily than women for the same behavior . A related University of New Mexico summary published earlier in October , reported the same core finding .
本段译文 为检验性别差异，团队开展了三项研究。一项跟踪了272名本科生组成的五人课程项目组，跨越一个学期。学生先报告队友间的负面闲话；数周后再互评能力与领导力。另外两项针对约450名美国劳动者的在线实验确认了一致模式：传闲话者总体评分更低，且男性因同样行为被扣分更重。新墨西哥大学十月初的相关综述报告了同一核心发现。
The Journal of Organizational Behavior paper matters for workplaces that rely on flat structures and self-managing teams . In such settings , leaders often emerge through everyday social interaction rather than a fixed title . If stereotypes quietly shape those judgments , organizations may overlook capable people . Hetrick stresses a broader lesson : gender rules do not only constrain how women should act at work ; they also limit men . Clearer , more objective criteria for leadership , she suggests , can reduce the power of those subconscious shortcuts .
本段译文 这篇发表于《Journal of Organizational Behavior》的论文，对依赖扁平结构与自我管理团队的职场很重要。在这类环境中，领导者往往通过日常社交互动涌现，而不是靠固定头衔。若刻板印象悄悄塑造这些判断，组织可能忽视有能力的人。Hetrick 强调更广的教训：性别规则不仅约束女性在职场应如何表现，也限制男性。她认为，更清晰、更客观的领导力标准，可以削弱那些潜意识捷径的力量。
新闻来源