New research from Wharton’s Tiantian Yang proves that behind every great woman is another woman.

Her co-authored study on virtual career training found that women who attended remote classes exclusively with other women were much more likely to complete their training on time, earn professional certification, and get a job in their field—compared with women who attended mixed-gender classes.

The authors determined that the absence of men in the same-gender classes created psychological safety for the female participants, which led them to share personal stories, support each other with messages of encouragement, and swap employment resources. All those actions led to greater success for them.

The study is the first to show that gender homophily has distinct advantages for women in remote environments because it helps them build “identity-based trust.” The study is also a departure from previous research that finds women benefit from mixed-gender groups at work because men traditionally hold more authority and access to resources.

“The conventional wisdom for women is to find instrumental networks with men, which will help them more with their careers, but we ignore the benefit of women helping each other,” says Yang, a professor of management and sociology. “More help is always better, but it doesn’t have to come from men.”

The study, “With a Little Help from My (Girl) Friends: Field Evidence on Gender Homophily and Women’s Training Outcomes in Remote Environments,” appears in a special edition of Organization Science on remote work. The co-authors are Julia L. Melin, business administration professor at Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business, and Sofoklis Goulas, research scholar and lecturer at Yale University.

In a safe space, women build trust

The scholars partnered with a leading online career training platform in the U.S. to embed their experiments for the study. They collected 18 months’ worth of data on nearly 4,600 participants—both men and women who were randomly assigned to same-gender or mixed gender groups.

Yang says it’s important to note the context of the study: strangers signing up for the same program. That’s quite different from training or task groups formed within firms, where employees already know each other and follow established norms of culture and hierarchy.

“If we were studying that, the pre-existing relationships would affect the outcomes,” she says. “What we have in this platform is a clean slate. Everybody doesn’t know each other, so we are able to say all the effects are attributable to this new experience they are having within the platform group.”

The study found that:
• About 76% of women assigned to the same-gender group completed their training on time, compared with 67% of women in the mixed-gender group.
• A total of 15% of women in the same-gender group achieved professional certification, compared with 8% of women in the mixed-gender group.
• And 24% of women in the same-gender group found employment after certification, compared with 9% of women in the mixed-gender group.

Interestingly, gender homophily didn’t appear to help men. According to the paper, “increasing the proportion of men in a group did not yield comparable benefits for male participants, which suggests gender homophily’s positive effects are specific to all-women groups.”

‘More help is always better, but it doesn’t have to come from men.’
–Tiantian Yang

Women cheer each other on

Yang says she and her colleagues were surprised by the quantitative results. They predicted that women would benefit from all-women training groups, but they didn’t expect the percentage gaps would be so large. Their qualitative analysis explains why.

An examination of the messages exchanged by participants on the platform uncovered three key differences in communication between women in same-gender and mixed-gender groups. First, women in same-gender groups opened up about their shared identities as mothers, daughters, wives, and caregivers. They discussed their hobbies, career ambitions, fears, and vulnerabilities in detail. “I recently lost my husband in death in April, and it took something away that I cannot seem to get back. I am going back to the medical field where I began,” one woman wrote. Another wrote, “I have been a stay-at-home mom for the past seven years, doing everything for everyone else, to the point that I forgot how to do something for myself.”

“They were revealing so much personal information,” Yang says. “When they were assigned to same-gender groups, immediately they were pinging each other about themselves.” Yang notes that women in mixed-gender groups were far less expressive.

Second, women in same-gender groups used more affective expression, meaning they chose language that conveyed excitement, affection, and a sense of community. Yang says the women were rooting for each other. For example, one woman wrote, “Even though I know that it will only get more challenging as we continue our journey, I am hopeful that we can rely on one another for help and support.” Another wrote, “I’ve really enjoyed going through everyone’s posts, seeing the natural love and uplifting of each other. Wishing nothing but best success for everyone!”

Third, women in same-gender groups offered each other advice and exchanged resources, rather than being guarded or competitive. This ranged from tips on good study habits to leads on externships or jobs.

“They formed a lot of study groups so they could work together and review materials and prepare for the exams,” Yang says. “We see a lot of back and forth. It’s not one way; it’s reciprocal.”

‘Women often hold a lower status in the working environment, so that prompts them to seek help.’
–Tiantian Yang

Implications for business leaders

The study didn’t analyze training groups that consisted only of men. But Yang says the study wasn’t trying to determine what conditions most benefit men. They behave differently at work, she says, because they tend to have more advantages, authority, and resources.

“Women often hold a lower status in the working environment, so that prompts them to seek help,” she says. “And we have seen the tendency of men to be more self-reliant because of gender norms.”

Still, for businesses and organizations trying to structure training programs, especially in remote settings, the study offers some practical considerations. Women gain the most when they believe they are in a safe space, and there’s a limit to how much trust can be built in mixed-gender groups online.

“The presence of men in those groups was changing the way that women were acting with each other,” Yang says. “In a remote environment, everybody is new, and there is a lack of trust. The question is, what can create that trust? In our study, shared gender identity is a key toward building trust.”

Published May 5, 2026, by Knowledge at Wharton.