A Comparative Study of the Implicit and Explicit Gender Attitudes of Children and College Students - John J. Skowronski, Melissa A. Lawrence - 2000
Implicit attitudes and explicit attitudes toward men and women and toward male soldiers and female soldiers were assessed in fifth-graders (28 male, 31 female) and college students (43 male, 42 female). Women were rated more positively than men on an explicit attitude measure. Similarly, female soldiers were rated more positively than male soldiers, except among college men, who were pro-male soldier. Different results emerged from an Implicit Association Test using names of men and women (general gender condition) or of male soldiers and female soldiers (soldier name condition). Latencies indicated pro-female attitudes in the soldier name condition and among women and college students. Error rates also indicated pro-female attitudes, except for a pro-male preference among men in the general gender condition. Reasons that implicit and explicit attitude measures may produce such divergent results are discussed.
Preferring “Housewives” To “Feminists”: Categorization and the Favorability of Attitudes Toward Women - Geoffrey Haddock, Mark P. Zanna - 1994
Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term “women.” The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both “housewives” and “feminists.” The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants' values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between themselves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.
Are Women Evaluated More Favorably Than Men?: An Analysis of Attitudes, Beliefs, and Emotions - Alice H. Eagly, Antonio Mladinic, Stacey Otto - 1990
In an experiment in which male and female respondents evaluated the social category of women or men on several types of measures, analysis of respondents' attitudes toward the sexes and of the evaluative content of their beliefs established that they evaluated women more favorably than men. In addition, analysis of respondents' emotional reactions toward women and men did not yield evidence of negativity toward women at the emotional level. Nor did it appear that respondents' very positive evaluations of women masked ambivalence toward them. This research, therefore, provides strong evidence that women are evaluated quite favorably—in fact, more favorably than men.
A Meta-Analysis on the Malleability of Automatic Gender Stereotypes - Alison P. Lenton, Martin Bruder, Constantine Sedikides - 2009
Furthermore, given that men are, on average, liked less than are women (Eagly, Mladinic, & Otto, 1991; Rudman & Goodwin, 2004), it certainly seems there is ample scope for improving people’s beliefs about and expectations of men.
Brannon - Chapter 07 - Gender Stereotypes: Masculinity and Femininity
Listening to the conversations of groups of women or men saying terrible things
about the other may seem to confirm this view, but research results are not consistent with such a conceptualization. Although women are the targets of various types of discrimination in terms of economic, political, educational, and professional achievement, attitudes about women are not uniformly negative. Indeed, one line of research from Alice Eagly and her colleagues (Eagly, Mladinic, & Otto, 1991) showed that women as a category re-ceive more favorableevaluations than men. Results from a meta-analysis (Feingold, 1998) indicated that women received slightly more favorable ratings than men. Thus, people in general have positive feelings about the characteristics stereotypically associated with women; people believe that these characteristics provide fine examples of human qualities.
These findings are not consistent with an overall prejudice against women.
Peter Glick, Susan Fiske, and their colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002;
Glick & Fiske, 2001; Glick et al., 2000) have researched this puzzle in gender stereo-typing and formulated interesting answers. The focus of their research is their concep-tualization of sexism, that is, prejudice based on sex or gender. Their view separates positive from negative aspects of sexism. They call the negative aspects hostile sexism, and this concept includes negative attitudes toward women. They also consider benevo-lent sexism, which they conceptualize as positive attitudes that nonetheless serve to be-little women and keep them subservient. Benevolent sexism is reflected in the attitudes that women deserve special treatment, deserve to be set on a pedestal, and should be revered. Despite the positive nature of these beliefs, people who hold such attitudes tend to see women as weaker, more in need of protection, and less competent than men (Fiske et al., 2002).
Ironically, it may be the favorable traits stereotypically associated with women that
serve to perpetuate their lower status (Glick & Fiske, 2001). When people see women as warm and caring but less competent than men, they may give women positive evaluations but still feel that women need men to protect and take care of them. Thus, women’s sub-servience is justified. Men are not exempt from this type of ambivalent sexism; the stereo-typic characteristics of men can also be analyzed into hostile and benevolent components that are analogous to those that apply to women, but women’s hostile attitudes toward men do not erase men’s dominance (Glick & Fiske, 1999). This type of benevolent prejudice may rationalize racism as well as sexism, casting the dominant group as benevolent pro-tectors rather than oppressors.