Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 69, Issue 5–6, pp 289–296 | Cite as

Perceptions of Gender Discrimination across Six Decades: The Moderating Roles of Gender and Age

  • Andre Kehn
  • Joelle C. Ruthig
Original Article

Abstract

In the current paper we examined whether women and men view gender discrimination as having changed over time, and if so: 1) how it has changed and 2) whether changes in anti-women bias are viewed as directly associated with changes in anti-men bias. Based on prior research (Norton and Sommers, 2011; Sidanius and Pratto, 1999), it was hypothesized that older men (35 years and older) compared to younger men (18–34 years of age) would hold a zero-sum view of gender discrimination trends in that older men would perceive increases in anti-men bias to accompany decreases in anti-women bias. Conversely, women, regardless of age, were expected to perceive changes in anti-women bias as unrelated to changes in anti-men bias. Results based on data from an online U.S. national sample (n = 499) supported the hypotheses for older men (n = 58), younger men (n = 160), older women (n = 96) and younger women (n = 185) and corroborated parallel past findings that the historically dominant social group (older men in this case) perceive any status gained by a socially subordinate group (women) as coming at the dominant group’s expense.

Keywords

Gender discrimination Zero-sum view Gender differences Age differences 

Notes

Acknowledgment

Thanks are extended to Björn A. Kahrs and Lisa A. Paul for comments on an earlier version of this paper.

References

  1. Brandt, M. (2011). Sexism and gender inequality across 57 societies. Psychological Science, 22, 1413–1418. doi: 10.1177/0956797611420445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Caricati, L. (2007). The relationship between social dominance orientation and gender: The mediating role of social values. Sex Roles, 57, 159–171. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007- 9231–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Catalyst. (2012a). U.S. women in business. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/132/us-women-in-business
  5. Catalyst. (2012b).Women in the sciences. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/publication/209/women-in-the-sciences
  6. DeNavas-Walt, C., Proctor, B. D., & Smith, J. C. (2011). Income, poverty, and health insurance coverage in the United States: 2011 (U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60–226). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  7. Etaugh, C., & Spiller, B. (1989). Attitudes toward women: Comparison of traditional-aged and older college students. Journal of College Student Development, 30, 41–46.Google Scholar
  8. Foels, R., & Reid, L. D. (2010). Gender differences in social dominance orientation: The role of cognitive complexity. Sex Roles, 62, 684–692. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9775-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 697–721. doi: 10.1037/0022- 3514.84.4.697.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heaven, P. L., Organ, L., Supavadeeprasit, S., & Leeson, P. (2006). War and prejudice: A study of social values, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 599–608. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.08.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hegewisch, A., Williams, C., & Zhang, A. (2011). The gender wage gap: 2011 (Fact Sheet No. IWPR #C350). Retrieved from Institute for Women’s Policy Research http://www.iwpr.org/initiatives/pay-equity-and-discrimination/#publications
  13. Jackson, R. M. (1998). Destined for equality: The inevitable rise of women’s status. MA: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  14. Jones, J. (2005). Gender differences in views of job opportunity: The Gallup Poll. Princeton: The Gallup Organization.Google Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–920. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lips, H. M. (2003). The gender pay gap: Concrete indicator of women's progress toward equality. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3, 87–109. doi: 10.1111/j.1530- 2415.2003.00016.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McEwen, M. K. (1991). Biographical correlates of student leaders’ attitudes toward women. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 500–508.Google Scholar
  19. Mookherjee, H. N. (1995). Attitudes of Tennessee college students toward women. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 80, 863–866. doi: 10.2466/pms.1995.80.3.863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nash, J. F. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica, 18, 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Norton, M. I., & Sommers, S. R. (2011). Whites see racism as a zero-sum game that they are not losing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 215–218. doi: 10.1177/1745691611406922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schmitt, M. T., & Wirth, J. H. (2009). Evidence that gender differences in social dominance orientation result from gendered self-stereotyping and group-interested responses to patriarchy. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 429–436. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01520.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sibley, C. G., & Perry, R. (2010). An opposing process model of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62, 438–452. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9705-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sibley, C. G., Robertson, A., & Wilson, M. S. (2006). Social Dominance Orientation and Right Wing Authoritarianism: Additive and Interactive Effects. Political Psychology, 27, 755–768. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2006.00531.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Bobo, L. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998–1011. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sidanius, J., Sinclair, S., & Pratto, F. (2006). Social Dominance Orientation, Gender, and Increasing Educational Exposure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1640–1653. doi: 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00074.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stephens, N. M., & Levine, C. S. (2011). Opting out or denying discrimination? How the framework of free choice in American society influences perceptions of gender inequality. Psychological Science, 22, 1231–1236. doi: 10.1177/0956797611417260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (December 2011).Women in the labor force: A databook. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook2011.htm
  31. Zawisza, M., Luyt, R., & Zawadzka, A. (2012). Ambivalence toward men: Comparing sexism among polish, South African and British university students. Sex Roles, 66, 453–467. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0112-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of North DakotaGrand ForksUSA

Personalised recommendations