arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Exploring midlife identity negotiations in the context of the gender career gap: an interdisciplinary conceptual framework

Vanessa Burke et al.

Work, Aging and Retirement2025https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waae023article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.41

What the paper says

Abstract. The gender gaps in career outcomes (e.g., pay, promotion, leadership opportunities) observably widen during mid-career, yet research often neglects considerations of gendered age identities in explaining this disparity. The present paper addresses this through an integrative review of interdisciplinary literature and proposes a novel theoretical framework that combines midlife development and gender identity negotiations to better understand mid-career disparities. In this review, we (1) adopt an inter-categorical approach to explore how workers navigate the overlapping systems of gender and age in the workplace, (2) critically review midlife development literature, highlighting significant oversights in organizational research, and (3) we introduce a process model of midlife gendered identity negotiations. We detail the model, describing the antecedents, mechanisms, and outcomes of gendered aging identity negotiations on mid-career inequities. We provide a foundation for advancing research and designing interventions to address gender disparities in mid-career outcomes.

2 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waae023

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{vanessa2025,
  title        = {{Exploring midlife identity negotiations in the context of the gender career gap: an interdisciplinary conceptual framework}},
  author       = {Vanessa Burke et al.},
  journal      = {Work, Aging and Retirement},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waae023},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Exploring midlife identity negotiations in the context of the gender career gap: an interdisciplinary conceptual framework

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.