Search

People who feel powerless are motivated to gain power, which may include men endorsing hostile sexism to affirm societal power or women endorsing benevolent sexism to affirm power in relationships. We used four waves of an annual longitudinal panel sample (N = 58,405) to test whether within‐person changes in powerlessness predicted subsequent changes in men's hostile sexism and women's benevolent sexism. Results from a random intercept cross‐lagged panel model indicated that men who generally felt more powerless tended to endorse hostile sexism, but within‐person tests did not provide directional evidence linking men's powerlessness with hostile sexism. By contrast, women who generally felt more powerless endorsed benevolent sexism more strongly, and small within‐person lagged effects indicated that upward deviations in women's powerlessness in 1 year predicted stronger endorsement of benevolent sexism the following year. These results provide novel evidence that powerlessness motivates women's benevolent sexism and their toleration of gender inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Benevolent sexism is a set of attitudes towards women that are paternalistic and condescending but superficially kind, resulting in a host of negative intrapersonal and interpersonal consequences for its targets. While researchers have investigated benevolent sexism in general contexts for decades, only recently have researchers begun to explore the context of the workplace. This new focus on the workplace requires scale development and validation to appropriately measure the construct in this context. In line with this goal, the purpose of the study was to develop and validate the Benevolent Sexism in the Workplace (BSW) scale. Results from three studies indicated that the 19‐item BSW scale demonstrated robust initial evidence of reliability and validity. Specifically, Study 1 indicated that the BSW demonstrated the evidence of internal consistency and reliability across time, confirmed the predicted two‐factor structure through exploratory factor analysis and demonstrated that the scale predicted theoretically‐linked criterion variables. In Study 2, the results of the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the BSW factor structure found in Study 1 among a sample of working students, as well as examined additional, theoretically‐linked workplace criterion variables. Finally, in Study 3, the results of the confirmatory factor analysis and concurrent validity analyses provided additional support for the BSW factor structure and validity in a sample of working adults. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite being a defining issue in the culture war, the political psychology of abortion attitudes remains poorly understood. We address this oversight by reviewing existing literature and integrating new analyses of several large‐scale, cross‐sectional, and longitudinal datasets to identify the demographic and ideological correlates of abortion attitudes. Our review and new analyses indicate that abortion support is increasing modestly over time in both the United States and New Zealand. We also find that a plurality of respondents (43.8%) in the United States are consistently "pro‐choice," whereas 14.8% are consistently "pro‐life," across various elective and traumatic abortion scenarios. We then show that age, religiosity, and conservatism correlate negatively, whereas Openness to Experience correlates positively, with abortion support. New analyses of heterosexual couples further reveal that women's and men's religiosity decrease their romantic partner's abortion support. Noting inconsistent gender differences in attitudes toward abortion, we then discuss the impact of traditional gender‐role attitudes and sexism on abortion attitudes and conclude that, rather than misogyny, benevolent sexism—the belief that women should be cherished and protected—best explains opposition to abortion. Our review thus provides a comprehensive overview of the demographic and ideological variables that underly abortion attitudes and, hence, the broader culture war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three studies examine how women's benevolent sexism (BS) shapes support for other women's agentic responses to gender‐based threat. In Study 1, women read vignettes about a woman who agentically responded (vs. no response) to gender‐based threat (e.g., sexism). As hypothesized, BS predicted more positive attitudes towards the woman who chose not to challenge sexism and more negative attitudes towards the woman who did. Studies 2 and 3 focused on whether these effects are driven by the behaviour displayed by the target (response or not) or by the ideology it seeks to uphold (traditional or non‐traditional). There may be circumstances under which BS is associated with positive attitudes towards women's agentic (i.e., non‐gender role conforming) behaviour, for instance, when it is used to support traditional gender roles. Studies 2 and 3 showed that when women's agentic behaviour is used to uphold traditional gender roles (vs. challenge them), BS is positively associated with support for such behaviour. These findings underscore the importance of ideology underlying women's agentic behaviour: BS can support women's agentic responses that violate prescribed gender roles, so long as they reinforce the status quo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using hypothetical divorce cases we examine the role of gender stereotypes in decisions about child custody. Good mothers received greater custody allocations than did good fathers across a tightly matched pair of vignettes in three culturally distinct samples: Argentina, Brazil, and the United States (Study 1). Two follow‐up studies indicated that the warmth dimension of stereotype content partly accounted for the asymmetry in custody awards: The proportion of maternal‐primary custody was predicted by the tendency to ascribe warmth‐related traits—such as friendliness, generosity, or trustworthiness—to mothers (Study 2) and associate them with female over male nouns (Study 3). We also found that endorsing shared custody mitigated the asymmetry in custody awards documented in our studies. Together, these results highlight the interplay of stereotyped attitudes and egalitarian commitments in the context of judicial decisions about child custody. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance orientation ( SDO) is conceived as an individual's level of support for group-based hierarchy in general that causes support for more specific group hierarchies. According to social dominance theory, group differences in SDO underpin ideological and behavioural group differences related to specific group hierarchies. Using representative 5-year longitudinal panel data from New Zealand ( N = 3,384), we test whether SDO mediates effects of sex and ethnicity on legitimizing myths ( LMs) relating to gender and ethnic hierarchy over time. The SDO mediation hypothesis is supported in the case of hostile sexism. However, it is unsupported in the case of benevolent sexism and LMs relating to ethnic hierarchy, where there was no cross-lagged effect of SDO. Moreover, being in the dominant ethnic group is associated with more legitimization of ethnic hierarchy but less legitimization of gender hierarchy, which is inconsistent with the notion of a general orientation underpinning group differences in legitimation. There was mixed evidence for a reverse path whereby specific LMs mediate group differences in SDO across time. We argue for the need to find alternative ways to theorize ideological consensus and difference between groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the interactive effects of injunctive norm exposure and hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes on men's sexually aggressive responses during a behavioral analogue paradigm in which they interacted online with a bogus female partner. Heterosexual adult men (n = 201), recruited from an online sample, read fictional information regarding other men's approval of misogynistic, paternalistic, or egalitarian treatment of women, or non-gender-relevant control information. Through a media preference survey, men then learned that their female partner disliked sexual content in films, after which they had an opportunity to send her up to 120 sec' worth of either a sexually explicit or nonsexual film clip. Validating the online sexual aggression paradigm, men with a 1-year history of sexual assault exhibited more sexually aggressive responding during the film selection paradigm. Moreover, exposure to injunctive norm information produced a boomerang effect, such that men high in hostile sexist attitudes showed an increase in sexual aggression when confronted with paternalism and gender equality norms. Conversely, exposure to paternalism and gender equality norms suppressed the otherwise protective function of high benevolent sexism in reducing men's sexually aggressive tendencies. The implications of these results for social norms interventions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research converges on demonstrating that benevolent sexism (BS) is socially approved, whereas hostile sexism (HS) is socially disapproved. We postulated that a sample of married women would be likely to report that their husbands express hostile sexist attitudes and engage in related actions towards them more in private than public contexts, where they lie concealed from public censure. By contrast, the women would report that their husbands would be likely to express benevolent sexist attitudes and engage in related actions more in public than private contexts, where they are reinforced not only by their target (i.e. wife), but also by significant others and the society at large. We tested these hypotheses with a sample of Black, heterosexually married Zimbabwean women ( n = 109, mean age = 31.83). Results supported our hypotheses: the women reported hostile sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely to occur in private than public contexts; on the other hand, they reported benevolent sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely in public than private contexts. We conclude that differences in social approval of BS and HS account for these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much work has been carried out on sexist attitudes, but only little on sexist behaviors. The goal of the present research was to close this gap by testing how a variety of benevolent and hostile sexist behaviors correlate with implicit and explicit sexist attitudes. In Study 1 ( N = 126), we developed implicit association tests for benevolent sexism and hostile sexism and illustrated that implicit and explicit benevolent sexist beliefs, as well as implicit and explicit hostile sexist beliefs, were positively correlated. In Study 2 ( N = 83 of Study 1), we tested whether implicit and explicit benevolent and hostile sexist attitudes correlate with benevolent and hostile sexist behaviors. As expected, explicit benevolent (but not hostile) sexist attitudes predicted benevolent sexist behavior, whereas explicit hostile (but not benevolent) sexist attitudes predicted hostile sexist behavior. Implicit sexist attitudes did not predict sexist behavior. The implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present research, we examine the ways in which exposure to hostile sexism influences women's competitive collective action intentions. Prior to testing our main model, our first study experimentally induced high versus low levels of security-comfort with the aim of providing experimental evidence for the proposed causal link between these emotions and intentions to engage in social competition. Results showed that lower levels of security-comfort reduced women's readiness to compete socially with men. Experiment 2 investigated the effect of hostile sexism on women's emotional reactions and readiness to engage in social competition. Consistent with the proposed model, results showed that exposure to hostile beliefs about women (1) increased anger-frustration and (2) decreased security-comfort. More specifically, exposure to hostile sexism had a positive indirect effect on social competition intentions through anger-frustration, and a negative indirect effect through security-comfort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the sexist application of a morality concept ofTsika, characterized by communal traits, in the Shona culture of Zimbabwe.Tsikahas been defined as “politeness, civility and circumlocution” (Samkange & Samkange, 1980, p. 74), thus generally falling under communal traits. Theoretical literature suggests that althoughTsikais a cultural ideal for all Shona people, it is especially expected of women and children, and that women can be punished like children if they lackTsika. This research tested whetherTsikawould be expected more of women (and children) than men. In line with ambivalent sexism theory, it was predicted that, becauseTsikais constituted of communal traits, a bias in its expectation of women over men would be predicted by benevolent sexism. Furthermore, the research tested whether women (and children) would be judged more negatively than men if they defaulted onTsika. It was hypothesized that a more negative evaluation of women than men if they defaulted onTsikawould be predicted by hostile sexism. Results confirmed thatTsikais expected more of women than of men. Benevolent sexism and its interaction with hostile sexism predicted the bias in expectation ofTsikaof women over men. Results also confirmed that women who default onTsikaare evaluated more negatively than men. Hostile sexism predicted the bias in negative evaluations of women over men who default onTsika. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Zakrisson, I., Anderzén, M., Lenell, F. & Sandelin, H. (2011). Ambivalent sexism: A tool for understanding and improving gender relations in organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 64-70. This study tested predictions regarding ambivalent sexism, previously studied cross-culturally, here 'within-culturally', between groups from different organizational settings. Based on three samples (334 adults in general, 744 industrial employees, and 189 high school students), completing a Swedish version of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), the results revealed that men scored higher on hostile and benevolent sexism than women, and high school students scored higher than both adult samples on both forms of sexism. The results generally confirmed the predictions; the gender gap in benevolent sexism decreased as a function of increasing levels of general sexism and the correlation between hostile and benevolent sexism decreased with higher levels of general sexism. In fact, the groups scoring highest on general sexism displayed significant negative correlations indicating a polarized ideology of women among these groups. Implications, both theoretical and practical, derived from these results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research shows that women faculty members in academia continue to face systemic barriers to opportunity and advancement and that these barriers are particularly strong in science and engineering, and in university administration. University administrators and faculty members, however, have been slow to recognize that systemically gendered barriers will have to be reduced or eliminated in order for women faculty to advance in their careers. One key problem is that many, if not most, leaders in powerful decision-making roles in universities continue to embrace women-centred explanations for gender disparities in advancement through the academic ranks. University leaders' lack of recognition of institutionalized gender barriers suggests the need for greater dissemination of research findings (and training) about how systemic barriers operate and why these barriers disproportionately disadvantage women. In this article I first theorize universities as incongruous, gendered bureaucratic structures. I then outline an intervention strategy for enabling university faculty members and administrators to see incongruous, gendered bureaucratic structures and to then use this knowledge to develop strategies for addressing the problem of women's underrepresentation among science and engineering faculty. The strategy described is a case-study approach recently implemented at a mid-sized research-intensive university in the US Midwest. The workshop was part of a broader university programme aimed at transforming the university's cultures, practices and structures in ways that help to enhance the recruitment, retention and promotion of women scientists. I conclude by discussing the benefits and limitations of the case-study approach as a method for unsettling accepted knowledge about the gendered structures and normative practices of the university. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Benevolent sexism prescribes that men should cherish and protect women in intimate relationships. Despite the romantic tone of these attitudes, prior research indicates that benevolent sexism undermines women's competence, ambition, and independence. Ambivalent sexism theory proposes that benevolent sexism is able to incur these costs because the promise of a chivalrous and protective partner offers women security in their intimate relationships. We tested this key proposition by examining whether women who intensely need relationship security—women higher in attachment anxiety—are more attracted to men who endorse benevolent sexism. Highly anxious women (N = 632) rated men described as endorsing benevolent sexism as relatively more attractive, and reported greater preferences for partners to hold benevolently sexist attitudes. These results advance understanding regarding the underlying reasons women find benevolent sexism appealing and identify who will be most vulnerable to the potential costs of benevolent sexism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]