Does Alternating Between Masculine and Feminine Pronouns Eliminate Perceived Gender Bias in Text?

This study explores whether alternating betweenthe pronouns he and she ina text is an effective way to avoid sexist language.Participants were psychology students at a largemidwestern university and were predominately White and frommiddle-class backgrounds. Students read two versions ofan essay, one that alternated between masculine andfeminine pronouns and one that exclusively used paired, he or she-type pronouns. Readersperceived the alternating version to be biased in favorof females and lower in overall quality than the pairedversion. However, the alternating version appeared to be more effective at combating sexism,suggesting an alternating strategy may be desirable forauthors with this goal. If the author is not primarilyconcerned with increasing readers' awareness of gender issues, techniques such as pluralization or thesingular they may be moreappropriate.     

It is not all about the Benjamins: Understanding preferences for mates with resources

We contend that preferences for mates with resources or money might be calibrated on where a potential mate gets her/his money. In three studies (N = 668) we examined the nature of individuals’ preferences for mates who have resources or money. Both sexes preferred a long-term mate who has earned her/his money over other sources. In particular, women preferred mates who earned their money over other potential means of getting resources (i.e., inheritance, embezzlement, and windfall). Women maintained a high level of interest in mates who earned their money regardless of duration of the mateship whereas men became less interested in a mate who earned her money in the context of short-term relationships. Overall, the sexes preferred a mate who earned their money more strongly in the long-term than the short-term context. Results are discussed from evolutionary and sociocultural models of mate preferences.     

A test of whether attributions provide for self-enhancement or self-defense

It is well known that people often make attributions in a way that is favorable to their self-concepts (see R. L. Collins, 1996, for a review). However, it is less clear whether the primary effect is to enhance self-esteem or to defend against the possible loss of self-esteem. The authors performed an experiment to test these possibilities against each other. In a completely between-participants design, participants recalled either a positive behavior or a negative behavior that was performed by themselves or others. They then judged the positivity or negativity of the behavior and made trait attributions about the actor (i.e., himself, herself, or others). The results indicated that although judgments and trait attributions for positive behaviors were similar for the self and for others, judgments and trait attributions for negative behaviors were less negative for the self than they were for others. The authors interpreted these and other findings as supporting a defensive strategy rather than an enhancive strategy.     

Barriers to Learning Motivational Interviewing: A Survey of Motivational Interviewing Trainers' Perceptions

Trainers reported that motivational interviewing (MI)–inconsistent behaviors were frequently perceived during training and believed to create barriers to learning. More barriers were perceived in corrections than in mental health training audiences. Strategies to facilitate unlearning MI‐inconsistent behaviors may accelerate acquisition of MI.     

Alternating Between Masculine and Feminine Pronouns: Does Essay Topic Affect Readers' Perceptions?

Authors are routinely advised to avoid using masculine pronouns to refer to both men and women. Some style guides recommend alternating between masculine and feminine pronouns instead. Unfortunately, previous research with gender-neutral text indicates that readers perceive alternating pronouns to be biased in favor of women. We tested readers' perceptions of alternating pronouns in an essay on a traditionally feminine topic, on a traditionally masculine topic, and on a gender-neutral topic. There were four versions of each essay. One version alternated between masculine and feminine pronouns, a second version used paired masculine and feminine pronouns throughout the passage (e.g., ‘he or she’), and the remaining two versions used exclusively masculine pronouns or feminine pronouns. Readers overestimated the frequency of feminine pronouns in alternating text except when they occurred in an essay on a traditionally feminine topic. Readers also thought alternating pronouns were gender-biased and low in overall quality.     

Gender comparisons in the private, collective, and allocentric selves

Researchers (e.g., M. B. Brewer & W. Gardner, 1996; H. C. Triandis, D. K. S. Chan, D. P. S. Bhawuk, S. Iwao, & J. P. B. Sinha, 1995) have suggested expansion of the standard model of individualism-collectivism to include people's close personal relationships in addition to their identification with in-groups. There has been considerable discussion of the hypothesis that women are more collective, interdependent, relational, and allocentric than men (e.g., S. E. Cross & L. Madson, 1997; Y. Kashima et al., 1995). In the present study, the authors used the Twenty Statements Test (M. H. Kuhn & T. McPartland, 1954) to examine gender differences in the self-concept by assessing the accessibility of private, collective, and allocentric self-cognitions. The U.S. women described themselves with more allocentric and more collective self-cognitions than did the U.S. men. Discussion focuses on the implications of those data for interpretation of other gender differences as well as for traditional models of individualism-collectivism.