Search

A meta-analysis examined the extent to which socio-stmctural and psycho-cultural characteristics of societies correspond with how much gender and ethnic/racial groups differ on their support of group- based hierarchy. Robustly, women opposed group-based hierarchy more than men did, and members of lower power ethnic/racial groups opposed group-based hierarchy more than members of higher power ethnic/racial groups did. As predicted by social dominance theory, gender differences were larger, more stable, and less variable from sample to sample than differences between ethnic/racial groups. Subordi- nate gender and ethnic/racial group members disagreed more with dominants in their views of group- based hierarchy in societies that can be considered more liberal and modem (e.g., emphasizing individ- ualism and change from traditions), as well as in societies that enjoyed greater gender equality. The relations between gender and ethnic/racial groups are discussed, and implications are developed for social dominance theory, social role theory, biosocial theory, social identity theory, system justification theory, realistic group conflict theory, and relative deprivation theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on Anne Constantinople's research article on masculinity and femininity in 1973 and its implications for empirical feminism. Stereotypic attributes based on the target person's behavior versus the target person's sex; Analysis of pertinent topics and relevant issues; Implications for feminism and psychology.

Group-based power is generally associated with three types of group distinctions: adult-child, gender, and ethnicity. We argue that gender-based power is not comparable to ethnic-based power, in part because the forms and degree of institutional discrimination experienced by men and women of subordinate ethnic groups are not similar to one another, and in part because stereotypes and categorization processes pertaining to gender are not comparable across ethnic groups. Finally, in experiments using college students as participants, we show that whether applicants are placed into occupations that would enhance or attenuate group-based inequality depends jointly on job applicants' ethnicity and gender. Implications for theories of inequality based on gender and ethnicity and the relationship of gendered power to other group-based forms of power are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance theory assumes transsituational and transcultural differences between men and women in social dominance orientation (SDO), with men showing higher levels of SDO than women. SDO is a general individual-difference variable expressing preference for superordinate in-group status, hierarchical relationships between social groups, and a view of group relations as inherently 0-sum. Data from a random sample of 1,897 respondents from Los Angeles County confirmed the notion that men have significantly higher social dominance scores than women and that these differences were consistent across cultural, demographic, and situational factors such as age, social class, religion, educational level, political ideology, ethnicity, racism, region of national origin, and gender-role relevant opinion. The theoretical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a large panel sample of undergraduates, we measured the social dominance orientation (SDO) scores of men and women once a year across a 4½-year period. Employing repeated-measures ANOVAs, we found that, even after controlling for the character of students' academic majors (hierarchy enhancing or hierarchy attenuating), males showed significantly higher SDO scores than did females across the entire college career. The data are discussed in terms of the invariance hypothesis within social dominance theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A great deal of empirical research has shown that many of the behavioral and attitudinal differences found between males and females can be conceptualized as falling within the domains of "ranking" and "linking" orientations. This paper explores the three major paradigms that can be and have been used to explain the etiology of these male-female differences: (a) cultural determinism, (b) biological determinism' and (c) bicultural interactionism. It argues that, although there is no definitive evidence in support of any of these three major explanatory paradigms, the cultural and biological deterministic paradigms are difficult to reconcile with a good deal of empirical evidence. Hence, understanding male-female differences as a complex interaction between biological and cultural factors may be a more fruitful approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present experiment tested the impact of sexual objectification on women’s behavior in social interactions. We predicted that when objectified, women would narrow their social presence by spending little time talking, particularly when interacting with men. Participants (males and females) gave an oral introduction of themselves to an alleged interaction partner (male or female). Objectification was manipulated by having participants believe their bodies were either visually inspected or not inspected during this introduction. Specifically, participants introduced themselves through a closed-circuit device in one of three conditions: body (videotaped from the neck down), face (videotaped from the neck up), or audio (no videotaping). Women who were in the body condition and thought they were interacting with men spent less time talking than participants in all other groups. In addition, the majority of women disliked the body condition, indicating that they found having their bodies gazed at aversive. Implications for women’s behavior in mixed-sex contexts are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]