The authors present a theory of sexism formulated as ambivalence toward women and validate a corresponding measure, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI). The ASI taps 2 positively correlated components of sexism that nevertheless represent opposite evaluative orientations toward women: sexist antipathy or Hostile Sexism (HS) and a subjectively positive ( for sexist men ) orientation toward women, Benevolent Sexism (BS). HS and BS are hypothesized to encompass 3 sources of male ambivalence: Paternalism, Gender Differentiation, and Heterosexuality. Six ASI studies on 2,250 respondents established convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity. Overall ASI scores predict ambivalent attitudes toward women, the HS scale correlates with negative attitudes toward and stereotypes about women, and the BS scale (for nonstudent men only) correlates with positive attitudes toward and stereotypes about women. A copy of the ASI is provided, with scoring instructions, as a tool for further explorations of sexist ambivalence.

The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.

/pdf/science-faculty-s-subtle-gender-biases-favor-male-students-1999g000ej.pdf

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

The research examines an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes based on the evaluations that are automatically activated from memory on the presentation of Black versus White faces. Study 1, which concerned the technique's validity, obtained different attitude estimates for Black and White participants and also revealed that the variability among White participants was predictive of other race-related judgments and behavior. Study 2 concerned the lack of correspondence between the unobtrusive estimates and Modern Racism Scale (MRS) scores. The reactivity of the MRS was demonstrated in Study 3. Study 4 observed an interaction between the unobtrusive estimates and an individual difference in motivation to control prejudiced reactions when predicting MRS scores. The theoretical implications of the findings for consideration of automatic and controlled components of racial prejudice are discussed, as is the status of the MRS.

Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: a bona fide pipeline?

A central theme in recent research on attitudes is the distinction between deliberate, "explicit" attitudes and automatic, "implicit" attitudes. The present article provides an integrative review of the available evidence on implicit and explicit attitude change that is guided by a distinction between associative and propositional processes. Whereas associative processes are characterized by mere activation independent of subjective truth or falsity, propositional reasoning is concerned with the validation of evaluations and beliefs. The proposed associative-propositional evaluation (APE) model makes specific assumptions about the mutual interplay of the 2 processes, implying several mechanisms that lead to symmetric or asymmetric changes in implicit and explicit attitudes. The model integrates a broad range of empirical evidence and implies several new predictions for implicit and explicit attitude change.

/pdf/associative-and-propositional-processes-in-evaluation-an-1joiu6jzsx.pdf

Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.

Three experiments tested and extended recent theory regarding motivational influences on impression formation (S. T. Fiske & S. L. Neuberg, 1990; J. L. Hilton & J. M. Darley, 1991) in the context of an impression management dilemma that women face: Self-promotion may be instrumental for managing a competent impression, yet women who self-promote may suffer social reprisals for violating gender prescriptions to be modest. Experiment 1 investigated the influence of perceivers' goals on processes that inhibit stereotypical thinking, and reactions to counterstereotypical behavior. Experiments 2-3 extended these findings by including male targets. For female targets, self-promotion led to higher competence ratings but incurred social attraction and hireability costs unless perceivers were outcome-dependent males. For male targets, self-effacement decreased competence and hireability ratings, though its effects on social attraction were inconsistent.

/pdf/self-promotion-as-a-risk-factor-for-women-the-costs-and-5cg9c8fhad.pdf

Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: the costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management.

Prejudice and discrimination against women has become increasingly subtle and covert (N. V. Be-nokraitis & J. R. Feagin, 1986). Unlike research on racism, little research about prejudice and dis-crimination against women has explicitly examined beliefs underlying this more modern form ofsexism. Support was found for a distinction between old-fashioned and modern beliefs about womensimilar to results that have been presented for racism (J. B. McConahay, 1986; D. O. Sears, 1988).The former is characterized by endorsement of traditional gender roles, differential treatment ofwomen and men, and stereotypes about lesser female competence. Like modern racism, modernsexism is characterized by the denial of continued discrimination, antagonism toward women's de-mands, and lack of support for policies designed to help women (for example, in education andwork). Research that compares factor structures of old-fashioned and modern sexism and racismand that validates our modern sexism scale is presented.

Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices.

Muehienhard and Hollabaugh reported that 39% of college women engaged in "token resistance" (said "no" but wanted to have sex). Many of these women's reasons for their behavior explained a sexual refusal but not token resistance. The authors hypothesize that many token resistant women honestly refused but later decided to have sex. Evidence indicates that token resistant behavior occurs on or after the 11th date, whereas resistant behavior (said "no" and meant no) occurs earlier. In addition, 83% of token resistant women had more than one sexual intention during the token resistant episode. They said they resisted or were uncertain before they said "no" and neant yes. The authors conclude that most token resistant behavior is a change of intention that is poorly recalled because of memory consolidation. Women 's compliant sexual behavior (agreeing to unwanted sex) occurs for relationship maintenance reasons. Both behaviors are related to women's histories of rape.

Barbara A. Hunter

Papers

Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices.

Women's "Token Resistant" and Compliant Sexual Behaviors are Related to Uncertain Sexual Intentions and Rape: