Sex Roles

, Volume 19, Issue 9–10, pp 545–554

The effect of romantic and nonromantic films on perception of female friendly and seductive behavior

  • Janet Sigal
  • Margaret Gibbs
  • Bonnie Adams
  • Richard Derfler
Article

Abstract

Two experiments investigating gender differences in perception of nonverbal seductive and friendly cues were conducted using standardized videotaped interactions. Results of the first experiment indicated no gender differences in perceptions, contradicting previous results obtained by Abbey (“Sex Differences in Attributions for Friendly Behavior: Do Males Misperceive Females' Friendliness?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1982, 42, 830–838), who used a nonstandardized interaction. Results of the second experiment indicated that exposure to romantic and nonromantic scenarios in the media may produce contrast effects primarily affecting male interpretation of female nonverbal cues.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abbey, A. Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females' friendliness? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1982, 42, 830–838.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, R. A., & Byrne, D. Social psychology: Understanding human interaction, 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. Glaser, R. D., & Thorpe, J. S. A Survey of sexual contract and advances between psychology educators and female graduate students. American Psychologist, 1986, 41, 43–51.Google Scholar
  4. Johnson, C. B., Freshnock, N., & Saal, F. E. Friendliness or sexual come-on: A clue to under-standing sexual harassment. Paper presented at the annual concention of the American Psychological Association, 1986.Google Scholar
  5. Kenrick, D. T., & Gutierres, S. E. Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 37, 572–579.Google Scholar
  6. Przybyla, D. P. J. The facilitating effects of exposure to erotica on males prosocial behavior. Unpublished doctoral assertation, State University of New York at Albany, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. Reilly, T., Carpenter, S., Dull, V., & Bartlett, K. The factorial survey: An approach to defining sexual harassment on campus. Journal of Social Issues, 1982, 38, 99–110.Google Scholar
  8. Saal, F. E. Males' misperception of females' friendliness: Replication and extension. Paper presented at the convention of the Midwestern Psychological Association, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. Sigal, J., Gibbs, M., Fox, M., Auerbach, D., & Novaky, D. Campus sexual harassment: Victims, harassers and victim-harassers. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York City, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. Zillmann, D. Excitation transfer in communication mediated aggressive. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1971, 7, 419–434.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janet Sigal
    • 1
  • Margaret Gibbs
    • 1
  • Bonnie Adams
    • 1
  • Richard Derfler
    • 1
  1. 1.Fairleigh Dickinson UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations