Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pursuing Desires Rather Than Duties? The Motivational Content of Gender Stereotypes

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the current research we provide initial documentation of the motivational content of gender stereotypes. Drawing from regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1987, 1997), we distinguish between whether traits are perceived to be motivated by ideals, including hopes, dreams, and aspirations, and oughts, including responsibilities, duties, and obligations. In two studies of U.S. Midwestern undergraduates, participants rated the extent to which the traits of men or women are motivated by ideals or oughts. Study 1 included 137 introductory psychology students who rated gender stereotypic traits (e.g., competitiveness for men; sensitivity for women); Study 2 included 118 introductory psychology students who rated gender stereotypic or counterstereotypic traits (e.g., competitiveness for women; sensitivity for men). In both Studies 1 and 2, we demonstrate that people perceive women as especially motivated by ideals rather than oughts but men as equivalently motivated by ideals and oughts. These patterns emerge regardless of trait stereotypicality. In Study 3, we examined the relationship between perceptions of role flexibility and the perception of ideal motivation using a sample of 214 introductory psychology students from the Midwestern U.S. We found evidence that ascriptions of ideal motivation are associated with perceptions of role flexibility, which are greater for women. We discuss the implications of these beliefs for the legitimization of the existing gendered social system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allport, G. W. (1954/1979). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge: Perseus Books.

  • Bakeman, R. (2005). Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 379–384. doi:10.3758/BF03192707.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Banchefsky, S., Diekman, A., Johnston, A. (2013). Achieving equality vs. avoiding discrimination: Using regulatory framing to affect attitudes. Poster presented at the 2013 meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA.

  • Bianchi, S. M. (2011). Family change and time allocation in American families. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 638, 21–44. doi:10.1177/0002716211413731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., & Robinson, J. P. (2000). Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Social Forces, 79, 191–228. doi:10.2307/2675569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91, 55–63. doi:10.1093/sf/sos120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brescoll, V., & LaFrance, M. (2004). The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science, 15, 515–520. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00712.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brescoll, V. L., Uhlman, E. L., & Newman, G. E. (2013). The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 891–908. doi:10.1037/a0034701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972). Sex-role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 59–78. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1972.tb00018.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for American Women and Politics. (2015). Women in elective office 2015: Fact Sheet. New Brunswick: Rutgers. Retrieved from http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/levels_of_office/documents/elective.pdf.

  • Croft, A., Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). An underexamined inequality: Cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagements with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1088868314564789.

  • Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2006). Exposure to scientific theories affects women’s math performance. Science, 314, 435. doi:10.1126/science.1131100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., & Lewis, L. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991–1004. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–1188. doi:10.1177/0146167200262001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Goodfriend, W. (2006). Rolling with the changes: A role congruity perspective on gender norms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 369–383. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00312.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Eagly, A. H., & Kulesa, P. (2002). Accuracy and bias in stereotypes about the social and political attitudes of women and men. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 268–282. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Goodfriend, W., & Goodwin, S. (2004). Dynamic stereotypes of power: Perceived change and stability in gender hierarchies. Sex Roles, 50, 201–215. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000015552.22775.44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A., & Ferreira, M. C. (2005). Dynamic stereotypes about women and men in Latin America and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 209–226. doi:10.1177/0022022104272902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Eagly, A. H., & Johnston, A. M. (2010). Social structure. In J. F. Dovidio, M. Hewstone, P. Glick, & V. M. Esses (Eds.), The Sage handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 209–224). New York: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Diekman, A. B. (2003). The malleability of sex differences in response to changing social roles. In L. G. Aspinwall & U. M. Staudinger (Eds.), A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a positive psychology (pp. 103–115). Washington, D.C.: APA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Kite, M. E. (1987). Are stereotypes of nationalities applied to both women and men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 451–462. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 543–558. doi:10.1177/0146167289154008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goni-Legaz, S., Ollo-Lopez, A., & Bayo-Moriones, A. (2010). The division of household labor in Spanish dual earner couples: Testing three theories. Sex Roles, 53, 515–529. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9840-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.

  • Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319.

  • Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1–46. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60381-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, A. M., & Diekman, A. B. (2013, January). Perceiving desires, not duties: Believing women are ideally motivated legitimizes the existing system. In M. Williams (Chair), When and why women step back from status: The enduring and self-reinforcing power of traditional gender roles. Symposium conducted at the 2013 meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA.

  • Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Kivetz, Y., Rubini, M., Guermandi, G., & Mosso, C. (2005). System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotypes: Cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research, 18, 305–333. doi:10.1007/s11211-005-6827-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lenton, A. P., Sedikides, C., & Bruder, M. (2009). A latent semantic analysis of gender stereotype-consistency and narrowness in American English. Sex Roles, 60, 269–278. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9534-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, C. L., & Parker, S. (1995). Folk theories about sex and race differences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 45–57. doi:10.1177/0146167295211006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Rudman, L. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 140–151. doi:10.1037/a0018093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2001). Gender differences in depression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 173–176. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1996). Pluralistic ignorance and the perpetuation of social norms by unwitting actors. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 161–209). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629–645. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004–1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Goodwin, S. A. (2004). Gender differences in automatic ingroup bias: Why do women like women more than men like men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 494–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.494.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, L. C., Bianchi, S. M., & Robinson, J. P. (2004). Are parents investing less in children? Trends in mothers’ and fathers’ time with children. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1–43. doi:10.1086/386270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sczesny, S., Bosak, J., Neff, D., & Schyns, B. (2004). Gender stereotypes and the attribution of leadership traits: A cross-cultural comparison. Sex Roles, 51, 631–645. doi:10.1007/s11199-004-0715-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325. doi:10.1007/BF02766650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Labor. (2014). Women in the labor force: A databook (2014 ed., Report No. 1052). Washington, DC: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

We have no conflicts of interest.

Informed Consent

All participants were required to sign an informed consent prior to participation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Houston-Clear Lake, 2700 Bay Area Boulevard, Houston, TX, 77058, USA

    Amanda M. Johnston

  2. Department of Psychology, Miami University, Oxford, OH, 45056, USA

    Amanda B. Diekman

Authors
  1. Amanda M. Johnston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda B. Diekman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda M. Johnston.

Appendix

Appendix

Scientific research has shown that some traits are perceived as normative for women, and that women report high levels of at least some of these traits. We are interested in why you think women tend to have these traits.

In particular, we want to know whether you think women have these traits because they ideally want them (they hope, wish, and aspire for them), because they feel they ought to have them (they feel a duty, obligation, and responsibility to have them), or both.

Please rate your opinion about the reasons for these different characteristics. Please rate both items under each trait. Make your mark in between the lines, as shown.

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Johnston, A.M., Diekman, A.B. Pursuing Desires Rather Than Duties? The Motivational Content of Gender Stereotypes. Sex Roles 73, 16–28 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0494-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0494-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation