Hostile and Benevolent Sexism Measuring Ambivalent Sexist Attitudes Toward Women

University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst Center, Massachusetts, United States
Psychology of Women Quarterly (Impact Factor: 2.12). 02/1997; 21(1):119-135. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x

ABSTRACT Presents a theory of sexism as ambivalence, not just hostility, toward women. Ambivalent Sexism Theory distinguishes between hostile and "benevolent" sexism (each addresses issues of power, gender differentiation, and sexuality). Benevolent sexism encompasses subjectively positive attitudes toward women in traditional roles: protective paternalism, idealization of women, and desire for intimate relations. Hostile sexism encompasses the negative equivalents on each dimension: dominative paternalism, derogatory beliefs, and heterosexual hostility. It is argued that both forms of sexism serve to justify and maintain patriarchy and traditional gender roles. The validity of a measure of these constructs, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), is reviewed. Comparisons are offered between the ASI and other frequently used scales of attitudes toward women, with suggestions for the proper domains of different scales. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Download full-text


Available from: Peter Glick, Jan 27, 2014
1 Follower
776 Reads
  • Source
    • "Por outro lado, o paternalismo protetor está associado a uma perspetiva benevolente, na qual os homens são percebidos como protetores das mulheres devido à sua maior autoridade, poder e força física. Este paternalismo protetor é tanto mais evidente quanto maior for a dependência diádica dos homens, por exemplo, da sua esposa, mãe, ou fi lha (Glick & Fiske, 1997). Em contraste, os membros do grupo subordinado tendem a ressentir, de uma forma hostil, o estatuto superior do grupo dominante, o ressentimento do paternalismo (Glick & Fiske, 1999). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A relação entre homens e mulheres é única e composta por desigualdade e preconceito dirigido aos membros do sexo oposto. Enquanto a forma hostil de sexismo foi já muito estudada, o sexismo moderno é caracterizado pela simultaneidade de formas hostis e benevolentes de preconceito, e por isso conceitualizado como Sexismo Ambivalente. O objetivo deste estudo foi adaptar o Inventário de Sexismo Ambivalente (ASI) e o Inventário de Ambivalência em relação aos Homens (AMI) para a população Portuguesa, e avaliar as suas propriedades psicométricas. Ambos os inventários foram administrados a 258 estudantes universitários (31% homens e 69% mulheres), com uma média de idade de 27 anos. As análises fatoriais confirmatórias revelaram evidência da multidimensionalidade de ambos os inventários, validade fatorial, convergente e discriminante, e fiabilidade interna. Os homens revelaram níveis mais elevados de hostilidade e de benevolência dirigido às mulheres, as mulheres revelaram maiores níveis de hostilidade dirigida aos homens. A hostilidade em relação aos homens aumentou com a idade, enquanto a benevolência diminuiu. O preconceito hostil e benevolente foi maior em pessoas com menos anos de escolaridade. Religiosidade correlacionou significativamente com os índices de sexismo benevolente. Foi assim demonstrada a validade e confiabilidade da adaptação dos Inventários de Sexismo Moderno em Portugal.
    Psicologia Reflexão e Crítica 01/2015; 28(1). DOI:10.1590/1678-7153.201528114 · 0.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "To illuminate how women’s roles are circumscribed by both positive and negative attitudes, Glick and Fiske (1996, 1997, 2001) introduced Ambivalent Sexism Theory, according to which perceiving women as possessing both positive (e.g., warm, caring) and negative (e.g., manipulative, unreliable) characteristics simultaneously justifies and propagates inequalities between men and women (e.g., Cikara et al. 2009; Connelly and Heesacker 2012; Jost and Kay 2005; Sibley et al. 2007). These beliefs about the essential characteristics of women, and the essential differences between men and women, making each more or less adequate to fill particular roles in society, appear to be relatively universal (Fortin 2005; Harris 1991; Hofstede 1980). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sexist attitudes do not exist in a limbo; they are embedded in larger belief systems associated with specific hierarchies of values. In particular, manifestations of benevolent sexism (Glick and Fiske 1996, 1997, 2001) can be perceived as a social boon, not a social ill, both because they are experienced as positive, and because they reward behaviors that maintain social stability. One of the strongest social institutions that create and justify specific hierarchies of values is religion. In this paper, we examine how the values inherent in religious beliefs (perhaps inadvertently) propagate an unequal status quo between men and women through endorsement of ideologies linked to benevolent sexism. In a survey with a convenience sample of train passengers in Southern and Eastern Poland (N = 180), we investigated the relationship between Catholic religiosity and sexist attitudes. In line with previous findings (Gaunt 2012; Glick et al. 2002a; Taşdemir and Sakallı-Uğurlu 2010), results suggest that religiosity can be linked to endorsement of benevolent sexism. This relationship was mediated in our study by the values of conservatism and openness to change (Schwartz 1992): religious individuals appear to value the societal status quo, tradition, and conformity, which leads them to perceive women through the lens of traditional social roles. Adhering to the teachings of a religion that promotes family values in general seems to have as its byproduct an espousal of prejudicial attitudes toward specific members of the family.
    Sex Roles 05/2014; 70(9-10):387-399. DOI:10.1007/s11199-014-0379-3 · 1.47 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Similar to the sociological concept of agency (Gergen, 1999), group efficacy is the belief that one's ingroup can resolve the injustice inflicted upon it through unified effort, and it reflects group members' sense of collective power and capability to transform the situation of their group (Reicher, 1996; see also van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008). We hypothesized that whereas warmth-reassuring messages might inhibit disadvantaged-group members' collective action tendencies (e.g., Becker & Wright, 2011; Glick & Fiske, 1997), competence-reassuring messages would restore their belief that they are competent and worthy of receiving equal treatment , as well as capable of achieving it through collective action. The result would be greater readiness for such action. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Applying the Needs-Based Model of Reconciliation to contexts of group disparity, two studies examined how messages from outgroup representatives that affirmed the warmth or competence of advantaged or disadvantaged groups influenced their members’ intergroup attitudes. Study 1 involved natural groups differing in status; Study 2 experimentally manipulated status. In both studies, advantaged-group members responded more favorably, reporting more positive outgroup attitudes and willingness to change the status quo toward equality, to messages reassuring their group’s warmth. Disadvantaged-group members responded more favorably to messages affirming their group’s competence. Study 2 further demonstrated that the effectiveness of reassuring a disadvantaged group’s competence stemmed from restoring its threatened dimension of identity, irrespective of a change of the status quo. In line with Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), these results indicate that beyond the competition over tangible resources, groups are concerned with restoring threatened dimensions of their identities. Exchanging messages that remove identity-related threats may promote not only positive intergroup attitudes but also greater willingness to act collectively for intergroup equality.
    European Journal of Social Psychology 08/2013; 43(6):489-492. DOI:10.1002/ejsp.1975 · 1.78 Impact Factor
Show more