Marketing Letters

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 353–367 | Cite as

Is the Marlboro man the only alternative? The role of gender identity and self-construal salience in evaluations of male models

  • Brett A. S. MartinEmail author
  • Juergen Gnoth


This research examines how men react to male models in print advertisements. In two experiments, we show that the gender identity of men influences their responses to advertisements featuring a masculine, feminine, or androgynous male model. In addition, we explore the extent to which men feel they will be classified by others as similar to the model as a mechanism for these effects. Specifically, masculine men respond most favorably to masculine models and are negative toward feminine models. In contrast, feminine men prefer feminine models when their private self is salient. Yet in a collective context, they prefer masculine models. These experiments shed light on how gender identity and self-construal influence male evaluations and illustrate the social pressure on men to endorse traditional masculine portrayals. We also present implications for advertising practice.


Advertising Classification expectations Gender identity Self-construal Evaluations 



The authors thank the editors, the anonymous reviewers, Cristel Russell, David Griffith, and Simon Pervan for the helpful comments.


  1. Aaker, J. L. (1999). The malleable self: the role of self-expression in persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, 45–57. (February) doi: 10.2307/3151914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aaker, J. L., & Lee, A. Y. (2001). ‘I’ seek pleasures and ‘we’ avoid pains: the role of self-regulatory goals in information processing and persuasion. The Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 33–49. doi: 10.1086/321946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2003). The silence of the library: environment, situational norm, and social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 18–28. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ahluwalia, R. (2002). How prevalent is the negativity effect in consumer environments. The Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 270–279. (September) doi: 10.1086/341576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, K. L. (1986). Androgyny, flexibility, and individualism. Journal of Personality Assessment, 50(2), 265–278. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5002_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beere, C. A. (1990). Gender roles: a handbook of tests and measures. New York: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  8. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162. doi: 10.1037/h0036215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: a cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354–364. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bosson, J. K., Prewitt-Freilino, J. L., & Taylor, J. N. (2005). Role rigidity: a problem of identity misclassification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 552–565. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  12. Deaux, K. (1985). Sex and gender. Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 49–81, (January) doi: 10.1146/ Scholar
  13. Debevec, K., & Iyer, E. (1986). The influence of spokespersons in altering a product’s gender image: implications for advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 15(4), 12–20.Google Scholar
  14. Elliott, R., & Elliott, C. (2005). Idealized images of the male body in advertising: a reader-response exploration. Journal of Marketing Communications, 11(3), 3–19. doi: 10.1080/1352726042000263566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frable, D. E. S., Platt, L., & Hoey, S. (1998). Concealable stigmas and positive self-perceptions: feeling better around similar others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 902–922. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ganahl, D. J., Prinsen, T. J., & Netzley, S. B. (2003). A content analysis of prime time commercials: a contextual framework of gender representations. Sex Roles, 49((9/10)), 545–551. doi: 10.1023/A:1025893025658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garst, J., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1997). Advertising’s effects on men’s gender role attitudes. Sex Roles, 36(9/10), 551–572. doi: 10.1023/A:1025661806947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guimond, S., Chatard, A., Martinot, D., Crisp, R. J., & Redersdorff, S. (2006). Social comparison, self-stereotyping, and gender differences in self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), 221–242. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gürhan-Canli, Z., & Maheswaran, D. (2000). Cultural variations in country of origin effects. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 37, 309–317, (August) doi: 10.1509/jmkr.37.3.309.18778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the BEM sex-role inventory. Sex Roles, 39(11/12), 929–941. doi: 10.1023/A:1018836923919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holt, D. B., & Thompson, C. J. (2004). Man-of-action heroes: the pursuit of heroic masculinity in everyday consumption. The Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 425–440. (September) doi: 10.1086/422120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ickes, W., Schermer, B., & Steeno, J. (1979). Sex and sex role influences in same-sex dyads. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42(4), 373–385. doi: 10.2307/3033807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jaffe, L. J. (1994). The unique predictive ability of sex-role identity in explaining women’s response to advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 11(5), 467–482. doi: 10.1002/mar.4220110504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jaffe, L. J., & Berger, P. D. (1988). Impact on purchase intent of sex-role identity and product positioning. Psychology and Marketing, 5(3), 259–271.Google Scholar
  25. Levant, R. F., & Richmond, K. (2007). A review of research on masculinity ideologies using the male role norms inventory. Journal of Men’s Studies, 15(2), 130–146. doi: 10.3149/jms.1502.130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maas, A., Cadinu, M., Guarnieri, G., & Grasselli, A. (2003). Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 853–870. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martin, B. A. S. (2004). Using the imagination: consumer evoking and thematizing of the fantastic imaginary. The Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 136–149, (June) doi: 10.1086/383430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moore, T. M., & Stuart, G. L. (2004). Effects of masculine gender role stress on men’s cognitive, affective, physiological and aggressive responses to intimate conflict situations. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 5(2), 132–142. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.5.2.132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Palan, K. M., Areni, C. S., & Kiecker, P. (1999). Reexamining masculinity, femininity, and gender identity scales. Marketing Letters, 10(4), 363–377. doi: 10.1023/A:1008110204546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (1955). Family Structure and the Socialization of the Child. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Patterson, M., & Elliott, R. (2002). Negotiating masculinities: advertising and the inversion of the male gaze. Consumption, Markets and Culture, 5(3), 231–246. doi: 10.1080/10253860290031631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prior, M. (2004). With metrosexuals in mid-America, merchants explore ‘masculine side’. Drug Store News, 26(8), 63–65.Google Scholar
  33. Reed II, A. (2004). Activating the self-importance of consumer selves: exploring identity salience effects on judgments. The Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 286–295, (September) doi: 10.1086/422108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: the role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 157–176. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smart, L., & Wegner, D. M. (1999). Covering up what can’t be seen: concealable stigma and mental control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 474–486. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smiler, A. P. (2004). Thirty years after the discovery of gender: psychological concepts and measures of masculinity. Sex Roles, 50(1/2), 15–26. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000011069.02279.4c.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stern, B. B. (1988). Sex-role self-concept measures and marketing: a research note. Psychology and Marketing, 5(1), 85–99. doi: 10.1002/mar.4220050107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96(3), 506–520. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vigorito, A. J., & Curry, T. J. (1998). Marketing masculinity: gender identity and popular magazines. Sex Roles, 39(1/2), 135–152. doi: 10.1023/A:1018838102112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wade, J. C., & Brittan-Powell, C. (2001). Men’s attitudes toward race and gender equity: the importance of maculinity ideology, gender-related traits, and reference group identity dependence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 2(1), 42–50. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.2.1.42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ybarra, O., & Trafimow, D. (1998). How priming the private self or collective self affects the relative weight of attitudes and subjective norms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(4), 362–370. doi: 10.1177/0146167298244003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marketing Group School of ManagementUniversity of BathBathUK
  2. 2.Department of MarketingUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations