Power in stereotypically masculine domains: a Social Influence Strategy X Stereotype Match model

This work examines the hypothesis that stereotypes of groups to which low-power people belong should influence the perceptions and behavior of powerful people only when those stereotypes are both contextually relevant (e.g., women in masculine domains) and provide information of relevance given powerful people's beliefs about the relation between subordinates and goal attainment. Findings across two studies supported predictions. In a masculine domain, when high-power men were attentive to subordinate weaknesses that may produce thwarts to goal attainment, stereotypes of women defined the contextually relevant shortcomings of women, and stereotype-consistent high-power behaviors ensued. In contrast, when powerful men were attentive to subordinate strengths that may enhance goal strivings, stereotypes of women were uninformative (i.e., did not contain information about relevant strengths); female and male employees were responded to and, in turn, performed and reacted similarly. The implications of these findings for theorizing on the relation between power and stereotyping are discussed.     

Seeing women as objects: The sexual body part recognition bias

Objectification theory suggests that the bodies of women are sometimes reduced to their sexual body parts. As well, an extensive literature in cognitive psychology suggests that global processing underlies person recognition, whereas local processing underlies object recognition. Integrating these literatures, we introduced and tested the sexual body part recognition bias hypothesis that women's (versus men's) bodies would be reduced to their sexual body parts in the minds of perceivers. Specifically, we adopted the parts versus whole body recognition paradigm, which is a robust indicator of local versus global processing. The findings across two experiments showed that women's bodies were reduced to their sexual body parts in perceivers' minds. We also found that local processing contributed to the sexual body part recognition bias, whereas global processing tempered it. Implications for sexual objectification and its underlying processes and motives are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Benevolently bowing out: the influence of self-construals and leadership performance on the willful relinquishing of power

Sometimes a group's best interest is served when powerful people relinquish power, but little theory or empirical research has investigated when and by whom power is willingly given-up. Using a simulated, online team competition, two studies demonstrated that people who were dispositionally high in interdependent self-construals were more likely to relinquish their position of leadership within a group when they perceived that their leadership performance on the task was unambiguously poor versus good. However, when given the ability to attribute performance to others rather than the self, leader's level of interdependent self-construal did not significantly influence their decisions to relinquish power. Overall, these findings suggest that factors such as perceived leadership performance, interdependent self-construals, and ability to defer blame all converge when making decisions in regards to how much power should be relinquished.     

The effects of leader illegitimacy on leaders' and subordinates' responses to relinquishing power decisions

This research examined how leader illegitimacy affects leaders' and subordinates' responses to relinquishing power decisions. The processes underlying responses to leader illegitimacy and relinquishing power were also examined. Across four studies, participants were placed in leader roles (Studies 1a/1b) or subordinate roles (Studies 2a/2b) in an online competition. In Studies 1a/1b, participants assigned a leadership role learned, via a leadership skills test, that their leadership was illegitimate or legitimate. By contrast, in Studies 2a/2b, participants assigned a subordinate role were confronted with either an illegitimate leader who retained their power after performing poorly or a legitimate leader who received the leader role after a poor‐performing leader had relinquished their power. Results demonstrated that leaders who felt they did not belong in their leadership role relinquished more power when their leadership was illegitimate (vs. legitimate) and subordinates who felt less in control and greater anger supported illegitimate (vs. legitimate) leaders less.     

Reliability of a modified People of Color Racial Identity Attitude Scale and a White Racial Identity Attitude Scale for a sample of master's counseling students

The reliabilities of Helms' People of Color Racial Identity Attitude Scale and White Racial Identity Attitude Scale when used with a sample of master's counseling students were explored for modified versions. Reliabilities were assessed using Cronbach alpha as a measure of internal consistency, and temporal stabilities were measured. Results were consistent with previous findings, with coefficients alpha ranging from .67 to .77 for the modified People of Color Racial Identity Attitude Scale, and from .36 to .84 for the modified White Racial Identity Attitude Scale. Analyses also identified items that may suppress internal consistencies in responding by this sample.     

The Effect of Patronizing Behavior and Control on Men and Women’s Performance in Stereotypically Masculine Domains

The purpose of the present research was to examine whether contextual cues related to control contribute to gender differences in math performance that emerge from patronizing behavior. Specifically, in two experiments, men and women received patronizing behavior (i.e., praise paired with a devalued position that did not provide an opportunity for monetary rewards) from a male leader in a stereotypically masculine domain. In this context, we manipulated contextual control cues and measured math performance. In Experiment 1, 113 undergraduates (60 women, 53 men) from a Midwestern University in the United States received the patronizing behavior and all position assignments were made either at the outset (no control) or multiple times (ambiguous control) from one patronizing leader. In Experiment 2, 132 undergraduates (53 women, 79 men) from a U.S. Midwestern University received patronizing behavior and position assignments were made by one leader (ambiguous control) or multiple leaders (enhanced control). Consistent with Hypothesis 1, women had lower performance expectations than men, but no reliable gender differences emerged for desire to succeed. Consistent with Hypothesis 2, gender differences in math performance only emerged in the ambiguous control conditions in Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 with men performing better than women. Finally, consistent with Hypothesis 3, women performed better in the enhanced control (vs. ambiguous control), despite receiving patronizing behavior. Implications for research on patronizing behavior, subtle sexism, and stereotype threat, as well as directions for future research are discussed.     

Male Role Norm Endorsement and Sexism Predict Heterosexual College Men’s Attitudes Toward Casual Sex,Intoxicated Sexual Contact,and Casual Sex

This study examined whether gender roles, particularly male role beliefs and sexism, may underlie self-reported attitudes toward and participation in casual sex and intoxication prior to sexual contact in a sample of heterosexual undergraduate men from the United States. We utilized online survey methods to examine whether men’s (N?=?223 from a large mid-Atlantic University) endorsement of traditional masculinity (power and status, toughness, and anti-femininity) and sexist attitudes regarding women’s roles (hostile, benevolent) were related to engagement in casual sex (i.e., number of one-time-only sex partners), and whether masculinity was related to intoxicated sexual contact (i.e., propensity to consume alcohol prior to sexual contact). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) revealed that, as expected, endorsement of the toughness male role norm was positively associated with favorable attitudes toward casual sex, and endorsement of benevolent sexism was negatively associated with favorable attitudes toward casual sex. Favorable attitudes toward casual sex, in turn, were positively associated with men’s reported number of casual sex partners, as partially mediated by intoxicated sexual contact. Further, toughness endorsement was positively associated with number of casual sex partners via its positive association with intoxicated sexual contact; whereas power and status demonstrated the opposite, negative pattern. We discuss the contribution of this research to the broader literature on gender roles and sexual behavior and the utility of the findings for interventions aimed at reducing men’s casual sex behavior and intoxication prior to sexual contact.     

Family Values and Antipathy Toward Gay Men

The role of family values in promoting prejudice toward gay men was examined. Participants high and low in support for family values were primed with family-relevant or neutral cues and were exposed to either a gay or a straight father who was described as a good or a bad parent. Both individual differences in family value support and situational primes of family values produced derogation of the gay father. Sympathy for the father in a child custody loss was also markedly low when family values were both endorsed and primed, and when the gay father was explicitly depicted as a bad parent. The findings have implications for Rokeach's (1972) belief congruence perspective, and for models that depict values as part of a mental associative network (Biernat, Vescio, & Theno, 1996; Feather, 1990).