Sex Roles

, Volume 77, Issue 5–6, pp 293–308 | Cite as

The Discrepancy Between How Women See Themselves and Feminists Predicts Identification with Feminism

  • Maartje H. J. Meijs
  • Kate A. Ratliff
  • Joris Lammers
Original Article


Many women who accept the basic tenets of feminist ideology are reluctant to call themselves feminists, which is problematic because feminist self-identification is related to a variety of positive outcomes. The present research tests the idea that discrepancies between women’s self-view and feminist-view on the dimensions of competence and warmth are related to identification with feminism. This supposition is guided by the idea that a full understanding of why women have difficulty embracing feminism must take into account not only their view of feminists, but also whether women see themselves as different from feminists. Three online survey studies, which included 387, 288, and 116 adult U.S. women, demonstrate that perception of warmth identification with feminism was lower if women regard feminists as less warm than they see themselves. For perceptions of competence, the direction of this discrepancy was irrelevant: The more women see feminists as differently competent (i.e., higher or lower), the less they identify with feminists. Moreover, perceived discrepancy predicted identification with feminism even after controlling for women’s agreement with feminist values. Both endorsement of feminist values and perceived discrepancy are important in predicting identification with feminism and therefore practical interventions to maximize identification should target both of these components. For perceived discrepancy, interventions to reduce feminist-self discrepancies will likely be most effective if they target stereotypes of feminists as being cold.


Feminism Self-concept Group identity Stereotyped attitudes Stereotype content model 



Data and experiment files will be made publicly available on the Open Science Framework ( upon manuscript acceptance. This research was supported by Project Implicit.


  1. Abele, A. E. (2003). The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 768–776. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.768.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290. doi: 10.1037/h0055756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Backus, F. R., & Mahalik, J. R. (2011). The masculinity of mr. right: Feminist identity and heterosexual women’s ideal romantic partners. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 318–326. doi: 10.1177/0361684310392357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  6. Bay-Cheng, L. Y., & Zucker, A. N. (2007). Feminism between the sheets: Sexual attitudes among feminists, nonfeminists, and egalitarians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 157–163. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00349.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162. doi: 10.1037/h0036215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Berryman-Fink, C., & Verderber, K. S. (1985). Attributions of the term feminist: A factor analytic development of a measuring instrument. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 51–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1985.tb00860.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bettencourt, K. E. F., Vacha-Haase, T., & Byrne, Z. S. (2011). Older and younger adults’ attitudes toward feminism: The influence of religiosity, political orientation, gender, education, and family. Sex Roles, 64, 863–874. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-9946-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., & Wheeler, S. C. (2006). Discrepancies between explicit and implicit self-concepts: Consequences for information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 154–170. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, L. S. (1986). Gender-role analysis: A neglected component of psychological assessment. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 23, 243–248. doi: 10.1037/h0085604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1999). Who women are, who women should be: Descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 665–692. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.5.3.665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burn, S., Aboud, R., & Moyles, C. (2000). The relationship between gender social identity and support for feminism. Sex Roles, 42, 1081–1089. doi: 10.1023/A:1007044802798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cowan, G., Mestlin, M., & Masek, J. (1992). Predictors of feminist self-labeling. Sex Roles, 27, 321–330. doi: 10.1007/BF00289942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cuddy, A. J. (2009). Just because I'm nice, don't assume I'm dumb. Harvard Business Review, 87, 24.Google Scholar
  16. Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61–149. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Beninger, A. (2011). The dynamics of warmth and competence judgments, and their outcomes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 73–98. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2011.10.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cuddy, A. J., Kohut, M., & Neffinger, J. (2013). Connect, then lead. Harvard Business Review, 91, 54–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development, 82, 766–779. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Devos, T., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Implicit self and identity. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 153–175). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  21. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Downing, N. E., & Roush, K. L. (1985). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model of feminist identity development for women. The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 695–709. doi: 10.1177/0011000085134013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Duncan, L. E. (2010). Women's relationship to feminism: Effects of generation and feminist self-labeling. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 498–507. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01599.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eisele, H., & Stake, J. (2008). The differential relationship of feminist attitudes and feminist identity to self-efficacy. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 233–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00432.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 617–626. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ellemers, N., Kortekaas, P., & Ouwerkerk, J. W. (1999). Self-categorisation, commitment to the group and group self-esteem as related but distinct aspects of social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 371–389. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199903/05)29:2/3<371::AID-EJSP932>3.0.CO;2-U.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Etaugh, C. (1975). Biographical predictors of college students’attitudes toward women. Journal of College Student Personnel, 16, 273–276.Google Scholar
  31. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.48.6.621.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77–83. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Fitz, C. C., Zucker, A. N., & Bay-Cheng, L. Y. (2012). Not all nonlabelers are created equal: Distinguishing between quasi-feminists and neoliberals. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 274–285. doi: 10.1177/0361684312451098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fortune. (2010, April 22). Fortune 500 women CEOs. Retrieved from
  38. Gawronski, B., Strack, F., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2009). Attitudes and cognitive consistency: The role of associative and propositional processes. In R. E. Petty, R. H. Fazio, & P. Briñol (Eds.), Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 86–117). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  39. Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing... Or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 353–363. doi: 10.1177/0361684316634081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hampp, A. (2012, November 30). Katy Perry, Carly Rae Jepsen Speak About Success, Empowerment at Billboard Women in Music Ceremony. Billboard. Retrieved from
  41. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113–135. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hogg, M. A. (2003). Social identity. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 462–479). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  45. Houvouras, S., & Scott Carter, J. (2008). The F word: College students’ definitions of a feminist. Sociological Forum, 23, 234–256. doi: 10.1111/j.1573-7861.2008.00072.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Howell, J. L., Gaither, S. E., & Ratliff, K. A. (2015). Caught in the middle: Defensive responses to IAT feedback among whites, blacks and biracial black/whites. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6, 373–381. doi: 10.1177/1948550614561127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hurt, M., Nelson, J., Turner, D., Haines, M., Ramsey, L., Erchull, M., & Liss, M. (2007). Feminism: What is it good for? Feminine norms and objectification as the link between feminist identity and clinically relevant outcomes. Sex Roles, 57, 355–363. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9272-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L., Yzerbyt, V., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.899.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16–32. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kelly, C. (1993). Group identification, intergroup perceptions and collective action. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 59–83. doi: 10.1080/14792779343000022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kite, M. E., Deaux, K., & Haines, E. (2008). Gender stereotypes. In F. L. Denmark & M. A. Paludi (Eds.), Psychology of women: A handbook of issues and theories (2nd ed., pp. 205–236). Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  52. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  53. Klandermans, B., & Oegema, D. (1987). Potentials, networks, motivations, and barriers: Steps towards participation in social movements. American Sociological Review, 52, 519–531. doi: 10.2307/2095297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Koch, A., Imhoff, R., Dotsch, R., Unkelbach, C., & Alves, H. (2016). The ABC of stereotypes about groups: Agency/socioeconomic success, conservative–progressive beliefs, and communion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 675–709. doi: 10.1037/pspa0000046.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. League of European Research Universities. (2012, July). Women, research, and universities: Excellence without gender bias. Retrieved from
  56. Leaper, C., & Arias, D. (2011). College women’s feminist identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for coping with sexism. Sex Roles, 64, 475–490. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-9936-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. Lee, A. (2014). The story of a t-shirt. Retrieved from:
  58. Lippa, R. A. (2001). On deconstructing and reconstructing masculinity–femininity. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 168–207. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.2000.2307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Liss, M., Hoffner, C., & Crawford, M. (2000). What do feminists believe? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 279–284. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb00210.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Liss, M., O'Connor, C., Morosky, E., & Crawford, M. (2001). What makes a feminist? Predictors and correlates of feminist social identity in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 124–133. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lottes, I. L., & Kuriloff, P. J. (1992). The effects of gender, race, religion, and political orientation on the sex role attitudes of college freshmen. Adolescence, 27, 675–688. Retrieved from
  62. Nelson, J., Liss, M., Erchull, M., Hurt, M., Ramsey, L., Turner, D., … Haines, M. (2008). Identity in action: Predictors of feminist self-identification and collective action. Sex Roles, 58, 721–728. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9384-0.
  63. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Parent, M. C. (2013). Handling item-level missing data: Simpler is just as good. The Counseling Psychologist, 41, 568–600. doi: 10.1177/0011000012445176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A., & Parent, J. D. (2002). Gender and managerial stereotypes: Have the times changed? Journal of Management, 28, 177–193. doi: 10.1177/014920630202800203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ramsey, L. R., Haines, M. E., Hurt, M. M., Nelson, J. A., Turner, D. L., Liss, M., … Erchull, M. J. (2007). Thinking of others: Feminist identification and the perception of others’ beliefs. Sex Roles, 56, 611–616. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9205-5.
  69. Redford, L., Howell, J. L., Meijs, M. H. J., & Ratliff, K. A. (2016). Implicit and explicit attitudes toward feminist prototypes predict identification as feminist. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. doi: 10.1177/1368430216630193. Advance online publication.Google Scholar
  70. Reid, A., & Purcell, N. (2004). Pathways to feminist identification. Sex Roles, 50, 759–769. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000029095.40767.3c.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Robnett, R., Anderson, K., & Hunter, L. E. (2012). Predicting feminist identity: Associations between gender-traditional attitudes, feminist stereotyping, and ethnicity. Sex Roles, 67, 143–157. doi: 10.1007/s11199-012-0170-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rosenberg, S., Nelson, C., & Vivekananthan, P. S. (1968). A multidimensional approach to the structure of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 283–294. doi: 10.1037/h0026086.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743–762. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rudman, L., & Phelan, J. (2007). The interpersonal power of feminism: Is feminism good for romantic relationships? Sex Roles, 57, 787–799. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9319-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sanders, M. S., & Ramasubramanian, S. (2012). An examination of African Americans' stereotyped perceptions of fictional media characters. Howard Journal of Communications, 23, 17–39. doi: 10.1080/10646175.2012.641869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Saunders, K. J., & Kashubeck-West, S. (2006). The relations among feminist identity development, gender-role orientation, and psychological well-being in women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 199–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00282.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. E. (2000). Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 44–53. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01021.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). Who likes competent women? Competence, sex-role congruence of interests, and subjects' attitudes toward women as determinants of interpersonal attraction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2, 197–213. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1972.tb01272.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stürmer, S., & Simon, B. (2004). The role of collective identification in social movement participation: A panel study in the context of the German gay movement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 263–277. doi: 10.1177/0146167203256690.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Suter, E., & Toller, P. (2006). Gender role and feminism revisited: A follow-up study. Sex Roles, 55, 135–146. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9065-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Szymanski, D. (2004). Relations among dimensions of feminism and internalized heterosexism in lesbians and bisexual women. Sex Roles, 51, 145–159. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000037759.33014.55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13, 65–93. doi: 10.1177/053901847401300204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  84. Tavris, C. (1973). Who likes women’s liberation—and why: The case of unliberated liberals. Journal of Social Issues, 29, 175–198. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1973.tb00110.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. The Economist. (2014, March 8). The glass-ceiling index. London: The Economist Newspaper Limited.Google Scholar
  86. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  87. Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325. doi: 10.1007/BF02766650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Twenge, J. M., & Zucker, A. N. (1999). What is a feminist? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 591–605. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00383.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. United Nations. (2010). The world’s women 2010. Trends and statistics. Retrieved from
  90. United States Department of Labor. (2010). Quick stats on women workers. Retrieved from
  91. Van Knippenberg, A., & Ellemers, N. (1990). Social identity and intergroup differentiation processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 137–169. doi: 10.1080/14792779108401860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Vonk, R. (1996). Negativity and potency effects in impression formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 851–865. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199611)26:6<851::AID-EJSP790>3.0.CO;2-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Vonk, R. (1999). Impression formation and impression management: Motives, traits, and likeability inferred from self-promoting and self-deprecating behavior. Social Cognition, 17, 390–412. doi: 10.1521/soco.1999.17.4.390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. White, J. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2009). Think women, think warm: Stereotype content activation in women with a salient gender identity, using a modified Stroop task. Sex Roles, 60, 247–260. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9526-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Williams, R., & Wittig, M. (1997). “I’m not a feminist, but…”: Factors contributing to the discrepancy between pro-feminist orientation and feminist social identity. Sex Roles, 37, 885–904. doi: 10.1007/BF02936345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Wojciszke, B., & Abele, A. E. (2008). The primacy of communion over agency and its reversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1139–1147. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Yoder, J., Perry, R., & Saal, E. (2007). What good is a feminist identity?: Women’s feminist identification and role expectations for intimate and sexual relationships. Sex Roles, 57, 365–372. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9269-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Yoder, J., Tobias, A., & Snell, A. (2011). When declaring “I am a feminist” matters: Labeling is linked to activism. Sex Roles, 64, 9–18. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9890-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Zanna, M. P., & Hamilton, D. L. (1972). Attribute dimensions and patterns of trait inferences. Psychonomic Science, 27, 353–354. doi: 10.3758/BF03328989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Zucker, A. N. (2004). Disavowing social identities: What it means when women say, “I'm not a feminist, but …”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 423–435. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00159.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Zucker, A. N., & Bay-Cheng, L. Y. (2010). Minding the gap between feminist identity and attitudes: The behavioral and ideological divide between feminists and non-labelers. Journal of Personality, 78, 1895–1924. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00673.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maartje H. J. Meijs
    • 1
  • Kate A. Ratliff
    • 2
  • Joris Lammers
    • 3
  1. 1.Tilburg Institute for Behavioral Economics Research (TIBER)Tilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CologneKölnGermany

Personalised recommendations