This article reports the development and psychometric properties of the Masculinity Contingency Scale (MCS), a measure designed to assess the extent that a man's self-worth is derived from his sense of masculinity. Across 4 studies, results provided support for this new measure's reliability and validity. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses provided support for a hierarchical model with a superordinate factor (masculinity contingency) and 2 factors that correspond to 2 subscales: MCS-Threat (self-worth is threatened by a lack of masculinity) and MCS-Boost (self-worth is boosted by confirmation of masculinity). Evidence for good reliability was demonstrated by high alpha coefficients and test-retest reliability. Evidence for convergent, discriminant, criterion-related, and incremental validity was demonstrated by testing the associations between the MCS and existing masculinity measures, sexism measures, homophobia, and trait self-esteem. The results indicated that, in general, high masculinity contingency scores were associated with negative social and personal outcomes. Furthermore, MSC-Threat scores were more strongly associated with these negative outcomes than MCS-Boost scores. These findings are discussed in light of the conceptual, methodological, and practical contributions of the MCS.

For over 50 years, a debate has existed over the use of Native American sports mascots; however, few empirical studies on the topic exist. The present study examined if supraliminal exposure to Native American mascots results in the application of negative stereotypes toward Native American people. Results indicated that the effect of Native American mascots was moderated by people's racial attitudes toward Native people. When exposed to Native mascots, people with a prejudiced attitude rated a Native American individual more stereotypically aggressive than those with a non-prejudiced attitude. However, this pattern did not occur when people were exposed to White mascots or neutral images. Furthermore, this pattern was not evident when people evaluated a non-Native individual. This overall pattern of results indicates that Native American mascots selectively facilitate the application of negative stereotypes, resulting in harmful evaluations of Native American people.

The impact of negative stereotypes can be harmful, and as a result, stigmatized targets are often motivated to deny their accuracy. However, at times, targets of even the most unflattering stereotypes embrace them as valid. Early stigma researchers conceptualized this self‐stereotyping as a form of internalized self‐hatred. However, within the last few decades, stigma researchers have challenged this notion. This more contemporary approach asserts that there are situations where endorsing negative stereotypes can actually be of use to those who are targeted by them. For instance, endorsing negative self‐stereotypes can be used to help justify the status quo, fulfill assimilation and differentiation needs, and protect against personal and social threats. The purpose of the present paper is to review both traditional and contemporary explanations for the causes and consequences of negative self‐stereotyping. In doing so, we highlight strengths and limitations within the self‐stereotyping literature and suggest future directions for research.

No abstract

Storybook tales, movies, and beauty magazines often communicate the message that beauty is malleable. Malleable beliefs are generally found to be beneficial, but this is not the case in the beauty domain. Across two studies, we found that the "beauty is malleable" belief puts women (but not men) at risk for harmful appearance concerns, such as basing their selfworth on physical attractiveness, increased appearance anxiety, and increased interest in cosmetic surgery. These results were found when beauty beliefs were measured (Study 1) and manipulated (Study 2). Thus, the message that beauty is malleable has a potentially harmful effect on women's lives. This work also suggests that the typical finding that malleable beliefs are beneficial may reverse when the domain in question has unattainable standards.