Sexist Behavior Undermines Women’s Performance in a Job Application Situation

Can sexist behavior in a job application context threaten women and cause them to underperform on a subsequent cognitive ability test? In a simulated job interview, 46 women and 46 men -- undergraduate and graduate students from the University of Heidelberg, Germany -- were confronted with either sexist (dominant and physically close) behavior by a male interviewer or non-sexist (friendly and neutral) behavior by the same confederate. Participants then solved math items and language-related items from a German standard intelligence test. In accordance with our hypothesis, the results indicated that female participants in the sexist condition performed significantly worse on the mathematical test than female participants in the control condition. The performance of female participants on the language-related test and male participants on both the math and language-related tests did not differ by experimental condition. After the sexist job interview, women’s impaired performance, occurring on the math items only (i.e., specific to the domain in which women are negatively stereotyped), suggests an influence of psychological and interpersonal processes on seemingly objective test outcomes.     

Damned if she does,damned if she doesn't: Consequences of accepting versus confronting patronizing help for the female target and male actor

Three studies examined how a woman's reaction to a man's benevolently sexist offer of help affected observers' perceptions. Results suggest a dilemma for women: A woman who accepted benevolently sexist help was perceived as warm but incompetent and less suited for a competence‐related job (management consultant), whereas a woman who declined help and asserted her independence as a woman was perceived as competent but cold and less suited for a warmth‐related job (day care worker). By contrast, observers viewed the male help‐offerer especially favorably (warmer, more competent, and more qualified as a management consultant) when the female target accepted (versus confronted) his patronizing offer. But only perceivers who endorsed benevolent sexism showed these effects. Implications for challenging benevolent sexism are discussed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Neuroticism in Marriage: II. The Incidence of Neuroticism (Continued)

Abstract

The purpose of the experiment was to demonstrate whether men are more aggressive when disappointed by a woman whom they like rather than dislike. First, 78 men, 19 to 24 years of age, were recruited by using a newspaper advertisement. They were then placed in one of the two conditions: They were confronted by a female confederate that they either liked or did not like; they then received either positive or negative personal evaluations by the particular confederate in relation to prose-reading tasks. Dependent measures on blood pressure, use of bogus electric shock on a person, and evaluation of the confederate were taken as measures of aggression. The following predictions were made: (a) Negative evaluations by the liked confederate would result in more aggression than by either a disliked confederate or by a liked confederate giving a positive evaluation, and (b) subjects would be more aggressive when the female confederate gave them a negative rather than a positive evaluation or when she was disliked rather than liked. Predictions were supported on all the measures of aggression.     

Perceptions of non‐target confronters in response to racist and heterosexist remarks

Research has established that targets who express disagreement with prejudicial comments directed toward their social group may be viewed negatively by those they confront or by members of social outgroups. Less research has examined how non‐target individuals who confront prejudicial remarks are perceived. The current studies were designed to examine how non‐targets who confronted racist (Study 1) and heterosexist (Study 2) comments would be perceived as a function of the level of offensiveness of the comment and the confrontation style used. The studies also examined whether confronting behavior would affect perceptions of the individual who made the prejudicial comment. Undergraduate participants read vignettes depicting a situation with a high or low offensive prejudicial comment in which a non‐target individual confronted assertively, unassertively, or not at all. Participants provided judgments of both individuals. Results indicated that non‐targets who confronted highly prejudicial comments either assertively or unassertively were liked and respected more than those who failed to confront. Additionally, commenters who were assertively confronted were respected less than commenters who were not. These findings suggest that non‐targets may be especially effective in confronting prejudicial comments, as they do not suffer the same negative consequences as targets who confront. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How Sexy are Sexist Men? Women’s Perception of Male Response Profiles in the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory

In Studies 1 to 3, German female students (total N?=?326) rated the likability and typicality of male targets: a nonsexist, a benevolent sexist, a hostile sexist, and (in Studies 2 and 3) an ambivalent sexist. When targets were presented as response profiles in the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick and Fiske 1996) (Studies 2 and 3), the benevolent sexist was rated to be most likable but least typical, whereas the ambivalent sexist was rated to be highly typical. Thus, women were aware of a link between benevolent and hostile sexism and approved of men’s benevolent sexism, especially when it was not paired with hostile sexism. Likability ratings were moderated by participants’ own benevolent sexism and feminist attitude.     

He's a Laker; She's a “Looker”: The Consequences of Gender-Stereotypical Portrayals of Male and Female Athletes by the Print Media

Although an extensive qualitative literature shows that coverage of women's sport often focuses on female athletes' attractiveness (to the exclusion of their athleticism), there is a dearth of quantitative research examining exactly what effect this coverage has on people's perceptions of athletes. As part of a 2 (Gender of the Athlete: Female or Male) × 2 (Gender of the Participant: Female or Male) × 2 (Focus of the Article: Physical Attractiveness or Athleticism) between-subjects design, 92 predominantly White undergraduates (40 men, 52 women) read a fictitious newspaper profile about an Olympic athlete in which the article focused on the athlete's attractiveness (as coverage of female athletes often does) or on the athlete's athleticism (as coverage of male athletes often does). Interestingly, participants neither had favorable impressions of nor liked articles about female and male athletes when attractiveness was the main focus of an article. These findings suggest that the media should be cognizant of the harmful and erroneous impressions that can result from portraying athletes in terms of their personal attributes rather than their athletic accomplishments.     

The unexpectedly positive consequences of confronting sexism

Majority-group members expect to dislike those who confront them for prejudiced behavior. Yet if majority-group members are susceptible to the same social constraints as minority-group members, then their public responses to confrontation should be similarly inhibited. A tempered response to confrontation could smooth a potentially problematic social interaction, thereby producing an outcome that is better than expected. Female confederates confronted men during an interpersonal interaction and then had a second conversation. When interpersonally confronted, men reported equally positive evaluations of a sexist and gender-neutral confronter and confrontational interaction. Additionally, after the sexist confrontation, men's compensatory efforts increased mutual liking and this mutual liking then reduced men's use of sexist language. Thus, social forces also constrain those who are confronted as prejudiced, thereby positively influencing intergroup relations.     

Should I Confront Him? Men’s Reactions to Hypothetical Confrontations of Peer Sexual Harassment

This study investigated how men react to a hypothetical confrontation by a woman of a male sexual harasser. Participants were 250 male undergraduates from a Canadian university who read scenarios depicting sexual harassment that varied by type of harassment and style of confrontation. Findings suggest that men have more negative feelings and opinions of a female confronter, and would engage in more negative verbal behaviour if confronted about subtle versus overt harassment. Contrary to prediction, assertive/hostile confrontation styles were related to only limited negative reactions. Although this study found that men’s reported reactions were not markedly negative, we discuss the importance of these results for women in understanding what factors may increase the chance that men will react negatively.     

Bystander Sexism in the Intergroup Context: The Impact of Cat-calls on Women’s Reactions Towards Men

Despite the fact that sexism is an inherently intergroup phenomenon, women’s group-level responses to sexism have received relatively little empirical attention. We examine the intergroup reactions experienced by 114 female students at a U.S. university in New England who imagined being a bystander to a sexist cat-call remark or control greeting. Results indicate that women experienced greater negative intergroup emotions and motivations towards the outgroup of men after overhearing the cat-call remark. Further, the experience of group-based anger mediated the relationship between the effect of study condition on the motivation to move against, or oppose, men. Results indicate that bystanders can be affected by sexism and highlights how the collective groups of men and women can be implicated in individual instances of sexism.     

Sex Differences in Evaluations of Female and Male Victims' Responses to Assault

In an investigation of perceptions of victim response to assult, 84 female and 70 male subjects read a narrative in which either a female or a male victim was roughly assaulted by a male stranger. The victim was described as either offering no resistance, resisting in a verbally aggressive manner, or resisting in a physically aggressive manner. Results of 3 × 2 × 2 ANOVA's revealed that women and men expected different outcomes for aggressive victim resistance. Women anticipated a worse outcome than did men, especially for victims who resisted. Men expected the most favorable outcome for the victim when he or she fought with the assailant; women expected the most positive outcome with nonresistance, especially for female victims. Female victims were seen as much more likely than male victims to be raped by the assailant. Women rated rape as a more likely outcome for physically aggressive victims while men considered rape least likely when the victim fought back. Sex differences in evaluations of victim resistance are discussed in terms of identification and empathy with the victim, goals of the victim's response strategy, and the expected effectiveness of aggressive and nonaggressive reactions to attack.     

A Tale of Two Standards: An Examination of Young Adults�� Endorsement of Gendered and Ageist Sexual Double Standards

Current North American sexual standards allow women to be sexual within committed relationships but may still restrict women??s sexuality to a greater extent than men??s. We investigated whether these gender double standards interact with an age double standard that describes the elderly as less sexual than the young, to create particularly limiting sexual standards for older women. 305 Canadian undergraduates completed a 2 (target age) × 2 (target gender) × 2 (participant gender) within-subjects study measuring perceptions of younger (own age) and older (over 65 years old) men??s and women??s interest in traditional sex (e.g., cuddling, intercourse with main partner) and experimental sex (e.g., extra-relationship sex, viewing erotic materials). ANCOVAs controlling for ageist and sexist beliefs revealed the ageist double standard; the elderly were perceived to be less interested in sex overall than the young. There was also a sexual double standard; women were perceived to be more interested in traditional sex than men, and men more interested in experimental sex than women. For traditional sex, women perceived younger targets as more interested than the older targets, and women targets as more interested than men. For experimental sex, a three-way interaction showed the interplay between the sexual and ageist double standards. Elderly female targets were perceived as least interested, and young male targets as most interested. Results reinforce that the current sexual standards distinguish between sex for intimacy and sex for other reasons (e.g., pleasure) and that the standards are particularly restrictive for older women.     

Occupational stereotypes: activation of male bias in a gender‐neutral world

The goal of the present study was to determine whether gender‐neutral language, used to replace male‐biased language, carries an implicit male bias. Participants read passages in which a target occupation was introduced using either male‐biased or gender‐neutral nouns. A target sentence followed defining the gender of the occupational character. In Experiment 1, participants read target sentences defining the character as a woman more slowly following passages that contained male‐biased nouns and gender‐neutral nouns. In Experiment 2, an additional sentence was added that defined the occupational character as a woman. This information eliminated the reading disruption in Experiment 1 demonstrating that gender‐neutral language can moderate against activation of gender stereotypes when combined with an explicit mention that the occupational character is female.     

College Student Perceptions of Hypothetical Rape Disclosures: Do Relational and Demographic Variables Pose a Risk on Disclosure Believability?

The purpose of this investigation is to examine male and female students’ perceived believability of various rape disclosures, manipulated by the relationship (e.g., best friend, neighborhood woman) between the discloser and recipient as well as by various demographic characteristics of the discloser (e.g., gender, race, age). Data were collected online from 777 college students at a large southwestern university, of which 60 students did not report their gender. Of those participants who did report their gender, 342 are men and 375 are women. The average age of the sample is 22.23 years old (SD = 5.53). Results indicate that men and women do not differ in terms of reported believability of a discloser’s false rape disclosure to serve an ulterior motive of getting revenge on a man or falsifying a rape due to pregnancy. However, an examination of male and female students’ reports of discloser believability when examining various relational and demographic factors (i.e., best friend, neighborhood woman, young boy, Indian woman, white woman, black woman), indicate that women and men significantly differ in that women are more inclined to believe the discloser of the rape than men. Within gender differences also exist in terms of believability. Discussion and future directions follow.     

When Do Men and Women Make Attributions to Gender Discrimination? The Role of Discrimination Source

Two experiments examined the effects of discrimination source on men’s and women’s willingness to make attributions to a sexist experimenter or sexist rules. Students (161 male; 171 females) at a US university were exposed to a discriminatory person, discriminatory rule, or no discrimination. “Experiment 1” demonstrated individuals were less likely to make attributions to a sexist person than an unfair rule, and women were especially reluctant to indicate a person was responsible for their discrimination even when a person was the source. “Experiment 2” showed participants were less likely to indicate an experimenter, and even a rule, was sexist when there was a cost to the perpetrator (i.e., advisor would be notified of the perpetrator’s actions) for making such attributions.     

Employment Desirability: The Interactive Effects of Gender-Typed Profile,Stimulus Sex,and Gender-Typed Occupation

Using a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design we investigated the interactive effects of gender-typed profile (masculine, feminine), stimulus sex (male, female), and gender-typed occupation (firefighter, secretary) on employment desirability. Forty-five women and 35 men volunteered to participate (M age = 21.14, SD = 4.05). Most participants were white, however, people of various racial and ethnic backgrounds were represented in the sample. Each participant read one of eight scenarios describing (a) a man or a woman, (b) applying for a job as a firefighter or a secretary, and (c) described by male gender-typed or female gender-typed adjectives. Each scenario was followed by five employment desirability rating items. A significant three-way interaction revealed that participants rated male firefighters described by a masculine-typed profile the highest overall. Gender-typed occupation by stimulus sex was also significant; that is, the male firefighter received higher ratings than the female firefighter and the female secretary received higher ratings than the male secretary. There was a significant main effect for gender-typed profile, in that participants rated the masculine-typed profile more favorably than the feminine-typed profile. Overall, male and female participants did not differ significantly in their ratings of hiring desirability.