Sex Roles

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 527–539 | Cite as

Sexist language and person perception: Evaluation of candidates from newspaper articles

  • Signe A. Dayhoff


Use of sexist language significantly affects the evaluation and perception of candidates for office. Simulated newspaper articles describing a candidate were presented to subjects who rated candidates on evaluation and gender-stereotyping measures. Variables of degree of linguistic sexism, stimulus person sex, gender appropriateness of elective office, and subject sex were manipulated in a 2×2×3×2 factorial design. A significant three-way evaluation interaction indicated that linguistic sexism causes women to be negatively evaluated when seeking a “masculine” or “neutral” office. A significant two-way stereotype interaction suggested that linguistic sexism made more salient the gender appropriateness of the offices — candidates running for the “masculine” offices were perceived as more “masculine,” and candidates for the “feminine” offices as more “feminine.”


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. APA Task Force on Issues in Sexual Bias in Graduate Education. Guidelines on nonsexist use of language. American psychologist, 1975, 30, 682–684.Google Scholar
  2. Asch, S. Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1946, 41, 258–290.Google Scholar
  3. Bem, S. The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1974, 42, 155–162.Google Scholar
  4. Broverman, I., Broverman, D., Clarkson, F., Rosenkrantz, P., & Vogel, S. Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1970, 34(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
  5. Chobot, D., Goldberg, P., Abramson, L., & Abramson, P. Prejudice against women: A replication and extension. Psychological Reports, 1974, 35, 478.Google Scholar
  6. D'Andrade, R. Trait psychology and componential analysis. American Anthropology, 1965, 67, 215–228.Google Scholar
  7. Deaux, K., & Emswiller, T. Explanations of successful performance on sex-linked tasks: What is skill for the male is luck for the female. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 80–85.Google Scholar
  8. Dittmar, N. Sociolinguistics: A critical survey of theory and applications. London: Edward Arnold, 1976.Google Scholar
  9. Genauer, R. Linguistic sexism and the relative status of males and females (Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1977, 37, 7725A. (University Microfilms No. 77-11, 936, 139)Google Scholar
  10. Keppel, G. Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Key, M. Male/female language. Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  12. Lakoff, R. Language and woman's place. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. McGraw-Hill Book Company. Guidelines for equal treatment of the sexes in McGraw-Hill company publications (internal publication). New York: Author, 1974.Google Scholar
  14. Mischel, H. Sex bias in the evaluation of professional achievements. Journal of Educational Pscyhology, 1974, 66(2), 157–166.Google Scholar
  15. Pheterson, G., Kiesler, S., & Goldberg, P. Evaluation of the performance of women as a function of their sex, achievement, and personal history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 19, 114–118.Google Scholar
  16. Schneider, J., & Hacker, S. Sex role imagery and use of generic “man” in introductory texts: A case of the sociology of sociology. American Sociologist, 1973, 8, 12–18.Google Scholar
  17. Shaffer, D., & Wegley, C. Success orientation and sex-role congruence as determinants of the attractiveness of competent women. Journal of Personality, 1974, 42, 586–600.Google Scholar
  18. Vetterling-Braggin, M., Elliston, F., & English, J. (Eds.). Feminism and philosophy. Totowa, N.J.: Littlefield, Adams, 1977.Google Scholar
  19. Ward, J. Attacking the king's English: Implications for journalism in the feminist critiques. Journalism Quarterly, 1975, 52(4), 699–705.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Signe A. Dayhoff
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentBoston UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations