Sex Roles

pp 1–13 | Cite as

Does a Woman’s Marital Surname Choice Influence Perceptions of Her Husband? An Analysis Focusing on Gender-Typed Traits and Relationship Power Dynamics

  • Rachael D. Robnett
  • Marielle Wertheimer
  • Harriet R. Tenenbaum
Original Article

Abstract

Within Western cultures, most women in heterosexual relationships adopt their husbands’ surnames after marriage. In attempting to explain the enduring nature of this practice, researchers have noted that women tend to encounter stereotypes when they break with tradition by retaining their own surnames after marriage. A complementary possibility is that stereotypes are also directed toward men whose wives violate the surname tradition. The current research provides initial insight into this possibility through three studies that were conducted in the United States and United Kingdom with undergraduate and community samples (total N = 355; 254 women and 101 men). Study 1 revealed that participants predominantly referenced expressive traits when describing a man whose wife retained her surname. Study 2 built on these findings with an experimental design. Relative to a man whose wife adhered to the surname tradition, a man whose wife retained her surname was rated as less instrumental, more expressive, and as holding less power in the relationship. In Study 3, participants high in hostile sexism were particularly likely to rate a man as lower in power when his wife retained her surname. Collectively, findings provide insight into attitudes that may help to explain the longevity of the marital surname tradition. Findings also join with prior research in revealing links between commonplace marriage traditions and gendered power dynamics.

Keywords

Marriage attitudes Sex roles Masculinity Femininity Sexism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Paul Nelson for providing feedback on an earlier version of the present paper. We are grateful to Janice Yoder and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions during the review process. Desiree Melton provided assistance with coding.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethics Statement

This research was carried out at two institutions. The internal review boards at both institutions approved the study. All aspects of manuscript preparation aligned with the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association. My co-authors and I verify that this research is not under-review or published elsewhere.

References

  1. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: Isolation and communication in western man. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Boxer, D., & Gritsenko, E. (2005). Women and surnames across cultures: Reconstituting identity in marriage. Women and Language, 28, 1–11.Google Scholar
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carli, L. L. (1999). Gender, interpersonal power, and social influence. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, Z., Fiske, S. T., & Lee, T. L. (2009). Ambivalent sexism and power-related gender-role ideology in marriage. Sex Roles, 60, 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9585-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Las Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dion, K. L., & Cota, A. A. (1991). The Ms. stereotype. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00416.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Glick, P., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., Fiske, S. T., Blum, A. M. B., … Volpato, C. (2006). Is traditional gender ideology associated with sex-typed mate preferences? A test in nine nations. Sex Roles, 54, 603–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9027-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. (2011). Has dating become more egalitarian? A 35 year review using Sex Roles. Sex Roles, 64, 843–862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9957-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Emens, E. F. (2007). Changing name changing: Framing rules and the future of marital names. The University of Chicago Law Review, 74, 761–863.Google Scholar
  12. Etaugh, C. E., Bridges, J. S., Cummings-Hill, M., & Cohen, J. (1999). “Names can never hurt me?” the effects of surname use on perceptions of married women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 819–823. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00400.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Felmlee, D. H. (1994). Who’s on top? Power in romantic relationships. Sex Roles, 31, 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2006). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Forbes, G. B., Adams-Curtis, L. E., White, K. B., & Hamm, N. R. (2002). Perceptions of married women and married men with hyphenated surnames. Sex Roles, 46, 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019613819247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. French Jr., J. R. P., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research.Google Scholar
  17. Gaunt, R. (2013). Breadwinning moms, caregiving dads: Double standard in social judgments of gender norm violators. Journal of Family Issues, 34, 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12438686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Goldin, C., & Shim, M. (2004). Making a name: Women’s surnames at marriage and beyond. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18, 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gooding, G. E., & Kreider, R. M. (2010). Women’s martial naming choices in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 681–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X09344688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Graham, D. A. (2015, November 11). A short history of Hillary (Rodham) (Clinton)‘s changing names: How the democratic candidate’s evolving self-identification tells a story of women in American politics. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/a-short-history-of-hillary-rodham-clintons-name/418029/.
  23. Gurtman, M. B. (2009). Exploring personality with the interpersonal circumplex. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00172.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316634081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamilton, L., Geist, C., & Powell, B. (2011). Marital name change as a window into gender attitudes. Gender and Society, 25, 145–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211398653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312450709336664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hoffnung, M. (2006). What’s in a name? Marital name choice revisited. Sex Roles, 55, 817–825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9133-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffnung, M., & Williams, M. (2016). When Mr. right becomes Mr. wrong: Women’s postdivorce surname choice. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 57, 12–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2015.1113814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Humbad, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Iacono, W. G., McGue, M., & Burt, S. A. (2010). Is spousal similarity for personality a matter of convergence or selection? Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 827–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnson, D. R., & Scheuble, L. K. (1995). Women’s marital naming in two generations: A national study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57, 724–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones, L., Mills, S., Paterson, L. L., Turner, G., & Coffey-Clover, L. (2016). Identity and naming practices in British marriage and civil partnerships. Gender and Language. Advance online publication.Google Scholar
  32. Kopelman, R. E., Shea-Van Fossen, R. J., Paraskevas, E., Lawter, L., & Prottas, D. J. (2009). The bride is keeping her name: A 35 year retrospective analysis of trends and correlates. Social Behaviour and Personality, 37, 687–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leaper, C., & Friedman, C. K. (2007). The socialization of gender. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (pp. 561–587). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, T. L., Fiske, S. T., Glick, P., & Chen, Z. (2010). Ambivalent sexism in close relationships: (Hostile) power and (benevolent) romance shape relationship ideals. Sex Roles, 62, 583–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9770-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Luo, S., & Klohnen, E. C. (2005). Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: A couple-centered approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 304–326. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. MacEacheron, M. (2016). North American women’s marital surname change: Practices, law, and patrilineal descent reckoning. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2, 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-016-0045-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mills, S. (2003). Caught between sexism, anti-sexism and ‘political correctness’: Feminist women’s negotiations with naming practices. Discourse & Society, 14, 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926503014001931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Morgan, M. Y. (1987). The impact of religion on gender-role attitudes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Noack, T., & Wiik, K. A. (2008). Women’s choice of surname upon marriage in Norway. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 507–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pilcher, J. (2017). Names and “doing gender”: How forenames and surnames contribute to gender identities, difference, and inequalities. Sex Roles. Advance online publication.Google Scholar
  41. Robnett, R. D., & Leaper, C. (2013). “Girls don’t propose! Ew.” a mixed-methods examination of marriage tradition preferences and benevolent sexism in emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 28, 96–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558412447871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Robnett, R. D., Underwood, C. R., Nelson, P. A., & Anderson, K. J. (2016). “She might be afraid of commitment”: Perceptions of women who retain their surname after marriage. Sex Roles, 75, 500–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0634-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counter stereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues, 69, 322–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sassler, S., & Miller, A. J. (2011). Waiting to be asked: Gender, power, and relationship progression among cohabitating couples. Journal of Family Issues, 32, 482–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X10391045.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Scheuble, L. K., Johnson, D. R., & Johnson, K. M. (2012). Marital name changing attitudes and plans of college students: Comparing change over time and across regions. Sex Roles, 66, 282–292.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Shafer, E. F. (2017). Hillary Rodham versus Hillary Clinton: Consequences of surname choice in marriage. Gender Issues, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-016-9182-5.
  49. Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2007). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308319226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  51. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conception of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Thwaites, R. (2013). The making of selfhood: Naming decisions on marriage. Families, Relationships, and Societies, 2, 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1332/204674313X665913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vaidyanathan, R. (2015, June 11). A new wedding trend? The men taking their wives’ names. BBC News. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-33085652.
  54. Valetas, M. F. (2001). The surname of married women in the European Union. Population and. Societies, 367, 1–4.Google Scholar
  55. Way, N. (2011). Deep secrets: Boys’ friendships and the crisis of connection. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rachael D. Robnett
    • 1
  • Marielle Wertheimer
    • 2
  • Harriet R. Tenenbaum
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Nevada Las VegasLas VegasUSA
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of SurreyGuildfordUK

Personalised recommendations