Doing gender differently—The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women's endorsement of sexist beliefs

Becker, Julia C.; Wagner, Ulrich

doi:10.1002/ejsp.551

Cited by 92 publications

(120 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In postindustrial societies in the past half century, women's identities generally include a progressive option of having careers and sharing domestic work with men as well as a traditional possibility of being a homemaker (see Wood and Eagly 2012). In evidence of the differing content associated with these roles, German women with stronger gender identities of the progressive variety more strongly rejected sexist beliefs and were more likely to engage in collective action to improve conditions for women, but these relations did not hold among women with more traditional gender identities (Becker and Wagner 2009). The content of gender identities also may vary with current motives.…”

Section: Gender Identity Based On Self-categorizationmentioning

confidence: 96%

Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender identity reflects people's understanding of themselves in terms of cultural definitions of female and male. In this article, we identify two traditions of research on gender identity that capture different aspects of masculine and feminine gender roles. The classic personality approach to gender identity differentiates communal from agentic traits and interests. The gender self-categorization approach comprises identification with the social category of women or men. Based on the compatibility principle, each approach should predict behaviors within the relevant content domain. Thus, personality measures likely predict communal and agentic behaviors, whereas gender self-categorization measures likely predict group-level reactions such as ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation. Researchers have the option of using one or the other conception of gender identity, depending on their particular question of interest. Relying primarily on research conducted in the U.S., we show that both traditions provide insight into the ways that gendered self concepts link the social roles of women and men with their individual cognitions, emotions, and behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Gender Identity Based On Self-categorizationmentioning

confidence: 96%

Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They note how it might not be categories themselves that motivate people for action, but the content of such categories (van Zomeren et al, 2008(van Zomeren et al, , 2018. The authors present examples, such as Becker and Wagner's (2009) observation that identification with the category 'women' can mean identification both with feminist or traditionalist women, carrying substantial implications for research outcomes (e.g., which gender roles one supports). The fact that identity content is "assumed but not assessed, and interpreted but not actually tested" (van Zomeren et al, 2018, p. 127) mirrors our concern with operationalizations of collective action itself.…”

Section: Collective Action: Srt and Social Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Social Re-presentation for…’: An Action-Oriented Formula for Intergroup Relations Research

Buhagiar

Sammut

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intergroup relations are of crucial importance in contemporary times, with concerns around social representations, social influence and collective action remaining salient. A core aspect of intergroup conflict revolves around the notion of joint projects, whereby different collectives seek to promote their own project through processes of joint intentionality. Nonetheless, we contend that intergroup relations research can tackle the notion of projects more fruitfully by studying the mutual understandings of projects of groups in conflict. Accordingly, we propose an action-oriented reformulation for intergroup relations research, which is contrasted with the standard object-oriented formula. Object-oriented research either (a) emphasizes the study of social objects without regard for their different construal by members of conflicting groups, or (b) focuses on 'social representations of' the objects in question, without regard for the projects that such representations serve. Contrastingly, action-oriented research (a) seeks to understand a collective's 'social re-presentation for' a specific project; and (b) studies the social and alternative re-presentation of objects and projects as a systemic product of intergroup relations. We then present illustrative examples of objectoriented research, followed by a study concerning Arab-Maltese relations in Malta as an example of action-oriented research. We end by making recommendations for future research on intergroup relations, with the aim of shedding light on the processes that bind coalitions for collective action.

show abstract

“…In spite of belonging to the target group of gender discrimination, women sometimes endorse hostile and benevolent sexist beliefs, thereby helping to stabilize the current gender hegemony (e.g., Barreto and Ellemers 2005;Becker and Wagner 2009;Glick et al 2000;Kilianski and Rudman 1998;Jackman 1994). Women's agreement with benevolent sexism is less astonishing than their endorsement of hostile sexism because benevolent sexism can be regarded as subjectively positive and kindhearted, whereas hostile sexism is clearly negative (Glick and Fiske 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Why Do Women Endorse Hostile and Benevolent Sexism? The Role of Salient Female Subtypes and Internalization of Sexist Contents

Becker

2010

Sex Roles

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research aims to explain women's endorsement of hostile and benevolent sexist beliefs. Based on a convenience sample of N=92 women in the general public in Germany, Study 1 demonstrated that women endorse hostile sexist beliefs when they do not think about themselves when completing the hostile sexism scale but about non-traditional female subtypes (feminists or career women). In contrast, women were more likely to agree with benevolent sexist beliefs the more they internalize these beliefs and the more they think about traditional subtypes (housewives) while completing the scale. A follow-up experimental study using a convenience sample of N=123 German women further demonstrated that these results depend on women's identification with the respective subtypes.

show abstract

Doing gender differently—The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women's endorsement of sexist beliefs

Cited by 92 publications

References 43 publications

Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity

Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity

‘Social Re-presentation for…’: An Action-Oriented Formula for Intergroup Relations Research

Why Do Women Endorse Hostile and Benevolent Sexism? The Role of Salient Female Subtypes and Internalization of Sexist Contents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About