An ambivalent alliance. Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality

The equation of prejudice with antipathy is challenged by recent research on sexism. Benevolent sexism (a subjectively favorable, chivalrous ideology that offers protection and affection to women who embrace conventional roles) coexists with hostile sexism (antipathy toward women who are viewed as usurping men's power). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, first validated in U.S. samples, has been administered to over 15,000 men and women in 19 nations. Hostile and benevolent sexism are complementary, cross-culturally prevalent ideologies, both of which predict gender inequality. Women, as compared with men, consistently reject hostile sexism but often endorse benevolent sexism (especially in the most sexist cultures). By rewarding women for conforming to a patriarchal status quo, benevolent sexism inhibits gender equality. More generally, affect toward minority groups is often ambivalent, but subjectively positive stereotypes are not necessarily benign.     

Personality feedback and situational norms can control stereotyping processes.

Impressions are influenced by motivations stemming primarily from the target (e.g., interdependence), 3rd parties (e.g., accountability or time pressure), or the self. The current studies investigate motivations stemming primarily from the self. In Study 1, Ss were given dispositional feedback about their abilities to categorize or to individuate. In Study 2, they were given situational information about the appropriate norms to categorize or to individuate. As predicted, dispositional feedback influenced low self-monitors, and situational information influenced high self-monitors. Both altered attention to potentially individuating category-inconsistent attributes as well as requests for additional information. Causal models further illuminated the mediating processes. These results suggest that people's flexible self-concepts are an important source of motivation in impression formation.     

Taboo Trade-offs: Reactions to Transactions That Transgress the Spheres of Justice

Taboo trade-offs violate deeply held normative intuitions about the integrity, even sanctity, of certain relationships and the moral-political values underlying those relationships. For instance, if asked to estimate the monetary worth of one's children, of one's loyalty to one's country, or of acts of friendship, people find the questions more than merely confusing or cognitively intractable: they find such questions themselves morally offensive. This article draws on Fiske's relational theory and Tetlock's value pluralism model: (a) to identify the conditions under which people are likely to treat trade-offs as taboo; (b) to describe how people collectively deal with trade-offs that become problematic; (c) to specify the conceptual components of moral outrage and the factors that affect the intensity of reactions to various explicit trade-offs; (d) to explore the various strategies that decision-makers—required by resource scarcity and institutional roles to confront taboo trade-offs—use to deflect the wrath of censorious observers; (e) to offer a method of dispute resolution based on pluralism.     

Self-concealment and suicidal behaviors

Understanding self-concealment, the tendency to actively conceal distressing personal information from others, may be important in developing effective ways to help individuals with suicidal ideation. No published study has yet assessed the relation between self-concealment and suicidal behaviors. Additionally, most self-concealment research has been conducted solely with younger adults. The relation between self-concealment and depressive symptoms among older adults (age 65 and older), and between self-concealment and suicidal behaviors among both younger (college student) and older adults, was investigated in this study. As predicted, self-concealment was significantly related to suicidal behaviors in younger adults. Furthermore, self-concealment was significantly related to depressive symptoms in older adults. Interestingly, the association between self-concealment and suicidal behaviors in this age group was not significant.     

Stereotyping,prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries: evolution,culture, mind,and brain

Social psychologists possess considerable enthusiasm and expertise in the study of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, having commenced in the 1920s and 1930s. Research and theory in the next three to four decades focused on motivation, followed by a reactively exclusive focus on cognition in the 1970s and early 1980s, in turn followed by a 1990s joint focus on cognition and motivation. Throughout, intra‐individual conflict analyses have alternated with contextual analyses, though both clearly have merit. Based on a social evolutionary viewpoint, a few core social motives (belonging, understanding, controlling, enhancing, and trusting) account for much current research on interpersonal category‐based responses. Trends for the future should entail more emphasis on behavior, more sensitivity to cultural specificities and universals, as well as budding efforts on neural mechanisms of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.