Gender-related biases in evaluations of sex discrimination allegations: is perceived threat the key?

Hypotheses derived from defensive attribution theory and social identity theory were tested in 3 laboratory experiments examining the effects of plaintiff and observer gender on perceived threat, plaintiff identification, and sex discrimination. In Study 1, women differentiated plaintiffs on the basis of gender, whereas men did not. Study 2 showed that this bias occurred because employment discrimination was personally threatening to women but not to men. In Study 3, the bias was reversed in a child custody context. As predicted, men found this context to be significantly more threatening than did women and subsequently exhibited a similarity bias. Mediation analyses suggested that responsibility attributions explained most of the variance in discrimination judgments associated with the plaintiff gender by observer gender interactions.     

You're Just Saying That Because I'm a Woman: Stigma Consciousness and Attributions to Discrimination

This study adds to tests of the construct validity of stigma consciousness by asking if people high in stigma consciousness demonstrate a greater tendency than people low in stigma consciousness to make attributions to discrimination. In a study that approached this question from both an individual difference and a situational perspective, women high or low in stigma consciousness made attributions for a negative evaluation, ostensibly written by a male peer. Under control conditions, women low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated less of a tendency to make attributions to discrimination than women high in trait stigma consciousness. When they experienced a situationally induced increase in stigma consciousness, however, participants low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated just as great a tendency to make attributions to discrimination as their high stigma conscious counterparts. The results provide further validation for the stigma consciousness construct, and raise questions about who benefits from attributions to discrimination.     

The Motivational Quality of Global Attributions in Hypothetical and Experienced Situations of Gender Discrimination

Traditionally, global attributions have been thought to reduce instrumental behavior aimed at resolving negative events. However, the present research shows global attributions for gender discrimination are related to taking action against unfair treatment. In Study 1, women ( N = 157) completed a questionnaire assessing attributions for hypothetical scenarios of discrimination and collective responses to discrimination. In Study 2, women ( N = 79) were placed into a laboratory situation of discrimination and asked to indicate their attributions for and responses to their unfair treatment. In both studies, hierarchical regression analyses showed that global attributions were related to both individual and collective responses to their discrimination. Implications for examining attributions in an intergroup context were discussed.     

Does witnessing gender discrimination predict women's collective action intentions for gender justice? Examining the moderating role of perceived female support

Previous research has indicated that witnessing gender discrimination may instigate women's participation in collective action for gender justice. However, relatively little is known about the role of perceived female support in motivating collective action among women who witness gender discrimination in public life. This study aims to analyse whether and when perceived support from feminist-minded women moderates the association between women's witnessing gender discrimination and their willingness to engage in collective action for gender justice. We argue that the association between witnessing gender discrimination and willingness to engage in collective action depends on the support women perceive from their female friends and family members. In studies of women in the U.S. (Study 1; N = 271) and Ukraine (Study 2; N = 256), witnessing gender discrimination predicted greater willingness to participate in collective action for gender justice, and this association was stronger when female support was perceived to be lower. Study 3 (N = 1,304) replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 with self-identified feminist women in Turkey. Our research offers novel insights regarding why perceived lack of female support may encourage women to engage in collective action for gender justice.     

Young Children's Sensitivity to Speaker Gender When Learning From Others

This research explores whether young children are sensitive to speaker gender when learning novel information from others. Four- and 6-year-olds (N = 144) chose between conflicting statements from a male versus a female speaker (Studies 1 and 3) or decided which speaker (male or female) they would ask (Study 2) when learning about the functions of novel objects. Some objects were in gender-typing colors (light pink or navy blue), and some were in a gender-ambiguous color (yellow). The results indicated that children did use speaker gender to guide their learning, by either consistently choosing to agree with the speakers of their own gender or making choices that are associated with gender stereotypes about color. The findings are discussed in relation to how in-group preference and stereotype attributions might influence children's learning from others.     

Associations Between Mixed-Gender Friendships,Gender Reference Group Identity and Substance Use in College Students

We investigated the associations between same-gender friendship, gender reference group identity, and substance use in college students (54 % male, M age?=?19.23, SD?=?1.23) from the northeastern United States using an online survey. Male students reported greater weekly marijuana, but not alcohol use than female students. Regression analyses revealed that having a greater proportion of same-gender friendships was associated with greater weekly alcohol use for male students and lesser weekly alcohol and marijuana use for female students. Gender reference group identity was negatively associated with weekly marijuana use for male and female students. For female students, gender reference group identity mediated the association between proportion of same-gender friendships and weekly marijuana use. Our study highlights the importance of considering the social context (e.g., the gender of friends) and individual variables relating to gender (e.g. gender reference group identity) in substance use research. Our findings fit within social constructionist models of social development that suggest participation in gendered contexts (e.g., same-gender or other-gender-peer contexts) over time cue gender-typed behaviors such as using marijuana.     

The attributional response of males and females to noncontingent feedback

The attributions of male and female college student subjects following exposure to noncontingent, contingent, and no-feedback conditions were analyzed in a 2×3 multivariate analysis of variance. The experimental hypothesis was that exposure to noncontingent feedback would result in more depressive attributions than exposure to contingent feedback or to no feedback, and that this effect would be moderated by gender. The hypothesis was partially supported in that females receiving noncontingent feedback on a concept discrimination problem subsequently made more internal attributions for negative events than male subjects receiving noncontingent feedback and female subjects receiving contingent feedback or no feedback.     

How status and stereotypes impact attributions to discrimination: The stereotype-asymmetry hypothesis

Past research suggests a status-asymmetry effect in attributions to discrimination such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when the victim is from a lower status group than the perpetrator as compared to when the victim is from a higher status group than the perpetrator. The present studies test a stereotype-asymmetry effect, such that people are more likely to make attributions to discrimination when rejection occurs in a domain in which the victim is negatively rather than positively stereotyped. In Study 1 (observers) and Study 2 (victims), participants attributed rejection following a job interview to discrimination more when the victim was negatively stereotyped than when the victim was positively stereotyped. The stereotypicality of the domain was more important than the relative status of the victim and the perpetrator in determining judgments of discrimination. Thus stereotype-asymmetry is a key feature of the discrimination prototype.     

Perceptions of Gender Discrimination across Six Decades: The Moderating Roles of Gender and Age

In the current paper we examined whether women and men view gender discrimination as having changed over time, and if so: 1) how it has changed and 2) whether changes in anti-women bias are viewed as directly associated with changes in anti-men bias. Based on prior research (Norton and Sommers, 2011; Sidanius and Pratto, 1999), it was hypothesized that older men (35 years and older) compared to younger men (18–34 years of age) would hold a zero-sum view of gender discrimination trends in that older men would perceive increases in anti-men bias to accompany decreases in anti-women bias. Conversely, women, regardless of age, were expected to perceive changes in anti-women bias as unrelated to changes in anti-men bias. Results based on data from an online U.S. national sample (n?=?499) supported the hypotheses for older men (n?=?58), younger men (n?=?160), older women (n?=?96) and younger women (n?=?185) and corroborated parallel past findings that the historically dominant social group (older men in this case) perceive any status gained by a socially subordinate group (women) as coming at the dominant group’s expense.     

Antecedents and Consequences of Perceived Personal Gender Discrimination: A Study of Solicitors in Hong Kong

Informed by social identity theory, we developed a model to examine the antecedents and consequences of perceptions of personal gender discrimination. In the model, gender, gender identity, and perceived gender bias against women are considered as salient predictors of perceived personal gender discrimination, and organizational commitment and intentions to leave are considered as the outcome variables. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the data collected from a sample of practicing solicitors in Hong Kong. We found that (a) women perceived more personal gender discrimination and gender bias against women than did men, (b) gender moderated the relationship between perceived gender bias against women and perceived personal gender discrimination, (c) the positive effect of gender bias against women on gender discrimination was more strongly positive for women than for men, and (d) perceived personal gender discrimination affected organizational commitment and intentions to leave. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Why do I feel this way? Attributional assessment of happiness and unhappiness

ABSTRACT

Much research has shown that how people explain events affects subjective well-being (SWB), in particular when they explain positive events as being due to internal, stable, and global factors, and negative events as being due to external, unstable, and local factors. In the current research, we asked: how do people explain their SWB itself, and how do such attributions in turn relate to SWB? In repeated measures studies 1 (N = 281) and 2 (N = 169) participants viewed happy feelings as more personally controllable, stable, and internally caused compared to unhappy feelings. In Study 3 (N = 142) participants made causal attributions about accurate SWB feedback, or about randomly assigned false (low or high) SWB feedback. Those in the false low-SWB feedback condition attributed their SWB to external and unstable factors controlled by others compared to those in the high-level feedback condition. In all three studies, attributing SWB to stable, personally controllable factors was positively associated with SWB.     

Perpetuating Gender Inequality via the Internet? An Analysis of Women’s Presence in Spanish Online Newspapers

This study examines women’s representation in Spanish national online newspapers. For this purpose, we developed an automatic content analysis method to analyze an extensive sample of 34,235 news articles gathered from March to May 2006. Our general objective was to investigate possible gender bias in Spanish online news. To do so we focused on three journalistic routines, one at the individual level of the reporter (gender) and two at the media routine level (sections, publication day, and article length). The results of the estimated multivariate models revealed that women are still linked to traditionally “female” sections, such as people, society, and culture. Analysis of article length and publication day showed that women appear more frequently in shorter news items and in the Sunday news, which we interpreted as indicators of male association with newsworthiness. We also found differences in gender reporting since female journalists tend to include more women in the news they report than their male peers. These results provide evidence that online newspapers continue to perpetuate underrepresentation, stereotyping, and discrimination of women in web news thereby reinforcing gender inequality.     

Gender’s Role in Misperceptions of Peers’ Sexual Motives

The sexual double standard influences men’s and women’s sexual attitudes and behavior, leading men and women to consider distinct sexual motives, or reasons whether or not to engage in sexual intercourse. The goal of the present paper was to document how the sexual double standard shapes perceptions of peers’ sexual motives. We build on past research by using open-ended questions and measuring perceptions of both same-gender and other-gender peers. The sample included 154 heterosexual college students (50 % female, 49 % European American, 25 % Latino American, 26 % African American) recruited via probability sampling. When we compared perceptions of men’s and women’s sexual motives, we found that participants seemed to rely on the sexual double standard. Participants were more likely to attribute a female-stereotyped motive (e.g., romantic relationship characteristics, feeling “ready”, emotional investment) and less likely to attribute a male-stereotyped motive (“easy”, arousal, physical appearance) to female peers than to male peers. However, when we compared participants’ own motives to perceptions of their peers’ motives, participants overestimated male-stereotyped motives and underestimated female-stereotyped motives in peers, regardless of peer gender, possibly in congruence with stereotypes of hookup culture. These findings demonstrate that, although individuals sometimes rely on the sexual double standard to attribute sexual motives to others, misperceptions of peers’ sexual motives may also be influenced by stereotypes of hookup culture. These misperceptions contribute to pluralistic ignorance that may influence college students’ sexual behaviors.     

The impact of informant gender on children’s endorsement of scientific and non-scientific information

By roughly 6 years of age, children acquire the stereotype that men are more competent than women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), potentially leading to greater trust in scientific information provided by men. This study tested whether 3- to 8-year-old children differentially endorsed conflicting information about science and toys presented by male and female informants depicted as a ‘man’ and ‘woman’ (Exp1) or ‘scientists’ (Exp2). Children were expected to endorse toy testimony from gender-matched informants; thus, the key question concerned endorsement of science testimony. In Exp1 (N = 149), boys and girls showed a same-gender informant preference for toy testimony; however, girls endorsed the male informant's testimony more for science than for toys – but only when tested by a male experimenter. In Exp2 (N = 264), boys and girls showed a same-gender preference, irrespective of content. Findings suggest that STEM-related gender stereotypes might lead girls to trust scientific information presented by men over women in certain contexts.     

Explaining Gender‐Based Language Use: Effects of Gender Identity Salience on References to Emotion and Tentative Language in Intra‐ and Intergroup Contexts

An experiment tested hypotheses derived from self‐categorization theory’s explanation for gender‐based language use. Under high or low conditions of gender salience, men and women sent e‐mail to an ostensible male or female recipient yielding either an intra‐ or an intergroup setting. Gender salience was manipulated so that the stereotypically feminine characteristic of supportiveness was the sole attribute that defined the prototype of intergender relations. Messages were examined for references to emotion and tentative language. Women referenced emotion significantly more than men in the high gender salience condition, but this gender difference was reduced when salience was low. Moreover, women with high gender salience in an intergroup context referenced emotion more than women with high salience in an intragroup setting or men with high salience in either an intra‐ or an intergroup context. Tentative language use, however, was similar across all conditions as anticipated.     

Attributions of Blame in Sexual Assault to Perpetrators and Victims of Both Genders1

Previous research found that men attribute more blame to rape victims than do women; men also attribute less blame to perpetrators. In rape situations with a male perpetrator and a female victim, the roles of perpetrator and victim are confounded with gender category. To determine whether men are more lenient toward perpetrators or toward other males, the present study examined attributions of blame in scenarios that varied the gender category of both perpetrator and victim. Results showed that men's and women's attributions of blame to perpetrators were based on the role that was enacted, rather than gender per se: Men attributed less blame to perpetrators than did women, regardless of the perpetrator's gender category, indicating that men were more lenient toward perpetrators than were women. In addition, when the victim was female, the perpetrator was blamed more and the victim was blamed less than when the victim was male.     

Utilization of global attributions in recognizing and responding to gender discrimination among college women

Although learned helplessness theories suggest that global attributions for gender discrimination may serve to promote feelings of helplessness about responding to discrimination, group consciousness theories suggest they may instead be a precursor to enhancing collective actions against discrimination. To examine this theoretical discrepancy, college women completed measures of attributions for gender discrimination, political consciousness (as measured by common fate), participation in collective action, and helplessness behavior among college women. To examine the unique role of global attributions, participants were included if they made external and unstable attributions for discrimination (N = 231). Structural equation modeling showed that recognizing discrimination occurs globally was associated with an increased sense of common fate, which in turn was related to greater collective action and less helplessness behavior. Theoretical (attributions in an intergroup context) as well as practical (institutional policies on publicizing discrimination) implications were discussed.     

Contextual Influences on Gender Segregation in Emerging Adulthood

To better understand contextual influences on gender segregation in emerging adulthood, we examined the extent to which college students (N?=?285; 178 females, 107 males) from the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. nominated same-gender peers when listing their close friends, preferred workmates for projects in English and math classes, and preferred partners for “hanging out.” We used an established, self-report measure to examine the relation between preferences to affiliate with same-gender peers and students’ gender-typed activity involvement (i.e., involvement in activities stereotypically associated with one’s own gender). The majority of close friends nominated by both women and men were same-gender peers, but men nominated relatively more same-gender friends than did women. Workmate nominations for class projects followed gender stereotypes. Women were least likely to nominate same-gender workmates for a math project compared to an English project or to “hang out.” Men were least likely to nominate same-gender workmates for a project in English compared to a math project or to “hang out.” For both women and men, nominating more same-gender friends and workmates was associated with less involvement in activities stereotypically associated with the other gender. The stability of emerging adults’ preferences for same-gender peers across contexts is discussed.