Abstract
The American Psychological Association’s (Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, American Psychological Association, 2019) style manual recently updated its guidelines to include the use they/them/their pronouns for situations where gender is unknown or irrelevant, which includes situations involving cisgender men and women. As such, we experimentally tested whether non-binary pronouns (“they/them/their”) would function as generic and inclusive singular pronouns for cisgender men and women. As a replication and extension of previous research (i.e., Crawford and English in J Psycholinguist Res 13 (5):373–3381, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068152, 1984; Stout and Dasgupta in Personal Soc Psychol Bull 37 (6):757–769, https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211406434, 2011), cisgender U.S. college students (N = 381; 269 women and 112 men; M age = 19.41 years old) were randomly assigned to read a job advertisement using: (1) masculine pronouns “he/him/his”, (2) binary pronouns such as “she or he”, or (3) singular non-binary pronouns “they/them/their”. Participants’ memory for the content of the job advertisement was tested along with assessments of sexism and belongingness (i.e., ostracism or feelings of exclusion, whether they identified with the described job, and whether they would be motivated for the work). As predicted, there were gender differences in memory scores in the masculine (men scored higher) and binary (women scored higher) pronoun conditions, but not in the non-binary condition. For all three indicators of belongingness, as predicted, men’s belongingness scores were similar across the three conditions (i.e., men were included or represented by the pronouns used in all three conditions), whereas women’s scores indicated less belongingness when masculine condition pronouns were used (i.e., where women were excluded by the pronouns used) in comparison to when the binary and non-binary pronoun were used (i.e., where women were included by the pronouns used). Together these findings provide empirical support for the use of “they/them/their” as singular non-binary pronouns to refer generically and inclusively to both cisgender men and women.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Data and are not currently publicly available. Materials related to the memory test are publicly available on the Open Science Framework (see https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/NKQXU).
Code Availability
N/A.
References
American Psychological Association. (1994). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.). American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association. (2019). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). American Psychological Association.
Arthur, A. E., Bigler, R. S., Liben, L. S., Gelman, S. A., & Ruble, D. N. (2008). Gender stereotyping and prejudice in young children: A developmental intergroup perspective. In S. R. Levy & M. Killen (Eds.), Intergroup attitudes and relations in childhood through adulthood (pp. 66–86). Oxford University Press.
Baranowski, M. (2002). Current usage of the epicene pronoun in written English. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6(3), 378–397.
Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
Bem, S. L., & Bem, D. J. (1973). Does sex-biased job advertising “aid and abet” sex discrimination? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1973.tb01290.x
Bigler, R. S., & Leaper, C. (2015). Gendered language: Psychological principles, evolving practices, and inclusive policies. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2(1), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215600452
Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2006). A developmental intergroup theory of social stereotypes and prejudice. In R. V. Kail & R. V. Kail (Eds.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 39–89). Elsevier Academic Press.
Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Developmental intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing children’s social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(3), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00496.x
Bradley, E. D. (2020). The influence of linguistic and social attitudes on grammaticality judgments of singular ‘they.’ Language Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2020.101272
Crawford, M., & English, L. (1984). Generic versus specific inclusion of women in language: Effects on recall. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13(5), 373–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068152
Dahlen, S. (2021). Do we need the word ‘woman’ in healthcare? Postgraduate Medical Journal, 97(1150), 483–484. https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-140193
DeLoache, J. S., Cassidy, D. J., & Carpenter, C. J. (1987). The three bears are all boys: Mothers’ gender labeling of neutral picture book characters. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 17(3–4), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287623
Gastil, J. (1990). Generic pronouns and sexist language: The oxymoronic character of masculine generics. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 23, 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289252
Geiger, A. W., & Graf, N. (2019). About one-in-five US adults know someone who goes by a gender-neutral pronoun. Pew Research Center.
Goldberg, S. (2017). Gender revolution [special issue]. National Geographic, 231(1), 1–70.
Golden, C. R., & McHugh, M. C. (2017). The personal, political, and professional life of Sandra Bem. (2017). Sex Roles: Journal of Research, 76, 529–543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0674-2
Green, H., & Riddington, A. (2020). Gender inclusive language in perinatal services: Mission statement and rationale. https://www.bsuh.nhs.uk/maternity/wpcontent/uploads/sites/7/2021/01/Gender-inclusive-language-in-perinatal-services.pdf
Hamilton, M. C. (1988). Using masculine generics: Does generic he increase male bias in the user's imagery? Sex roles, 19(11), 785–799. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288993
Henley, N. M. (1989). Molehill or mountain? What we know and don’t know about sex bias in language. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives. Springer.
Hyde, J. S. (1984). Children’s understanding of sexist language. Developmental Psychology, 20(4), 697. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.20.4.697
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581
Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & Van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307
Keener, E. (2015). The complexity of gender: It is all that and more….in sum, it is complicated. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 73, 481–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0542-5
Lambdin, J. R., Greer, K. M., Jibotian, K. S., Wood, K. R., & Hamilton, M. C. (2003). The animal = male hypothesis: Children’s and adults’ beliefs about the sex of non-sex-specific stuffed animals. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 48(11–12), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023567010708
Laverne, D. (2020, September 13). 4 steps to crate train your puppy + simple secret. Retrieved November 19, 2020, from https://pawleaks.com/4-steps-to-crate-train-your-dog/
Leaper, C. (2014). Gender similarities and differences in language. In T. M. Holtgraves (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 62–81). Oxford University Press.
Leaper, C., & Bigler, R. S. (2004). Gendered language and sexist thought. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 69(1), 128–142.
Liben, L. S., & Signorella, M. L. (1980). Gender-related schemata and constructive memory in children. Child Development, 51(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129584
MacKay, D. G. (1980). Psychology, prescriptive grammar, and the pronoun problem. American Psychologist, 35(5), 444–449. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.5.444
Martin, C. L., & Halverson, C. F. (1981). A schematic processing model of sex typing and stereotyping in children. Child Development, 52(4), 1119–1134. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129498
Martyna, W. (1980). Beyond the “he/man” approach: The case for nonsexist language. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 5(3), 482–493. https://doi.org/10.1086/493733
Maxwell, S. E., Lau, M. Y., & Howard, G. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean? American Psychologist, 70(6), 487.
Milles, K. (2011). Feminist language planning in Sweden. Current Issues in Language Planning, 12(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2011.541388
Modern Language Association of America. (2016). MLA handbook for writers of research papers (8th ed.). Modern Language Association of America.
Modern Language Association of America. (2020). How do I use singular they? Modern Language Association of America.
Moulton, J., Robinson, G. M., & Elias, C. (1978). Sex bias in language use: “Neutral” pronouns that aren’t. American Psychologist, 33(11), 1032–1036. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.33.11.1032
Moulton, K., Han, C., Block, T., Gendron, H., & Nederveen, S. (2020). Singular they in context. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1), 122. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1012
Pollitt, K. (2015, June 29). Who has abortions? The Nation. Retrieved October 8, 2021, from https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/who-has-abortions/
Signorella, M. L., Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (1997). A meta-analysis of children’s memories for own-sex and other-sex information. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18(3), 429–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(97)80009-3
Stahlberg, D., Braun, F., Irmen, L., & Sczesny, S. (2007). Representation of the sexes in language. In K. Fiedler (Ed.), Social communication (pp. 163–187). Routledge.
Stout, J. G., & Dasgupta, N. (2011). When he doesn’t mean you: Gender-exclusive language as ostracism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(6), 757–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211406434
Switzer, J. Y. (1990). The impact of generic word choices: An empirical investigation of age- and sex-related differences. Sex Roles, 22, 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288155
Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371
Tate, C. C., Ledbetter, J. N., & Youssef, C. P. (2013). A two-question method for assessing gender categories in the social and medical sciences. Journal of Sex Research, 50(8), 767–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.690110
Tate, C. C., Youssef, C. P., & Bettergarcia, J. N. (2014). Integrating the study of transgender spectrum and cisgender experiences of self-categorization from a personality perspective. Review of General Psychology, 18(4), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000019
The Associated Press. (2017). The associated press stylebook 2017. Basic Books.
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, W. K., & Gentile, B. (2012). Male and female pronoun use in US books reflects women’s status, 1900–2008. Sex Roles, 67, 488–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0194-7
Van Anders, S. M. (2015). Beyond sexual orientation: Integrating gender/sex and diverse sexualities via sexual configurations theory. Archives Sex Behavior, 44, 1177–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0490-8
Vergoossen, H. P., Renström, E. A., Lindqvist, A., & Sendén, M. G. (2020). Four dimensions of criticism against gender-fair language. Sex Roles, 83(5), 328–337.
Webster, G. (2017). The Chicago manual of style (17th ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., & Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored over the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(5), 748–762. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.748
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Casey McComb, Maevon Gumble, Celeste Tevis, Amanda Reichert, and Clare Mehta for their contributions to this project.
Funding
N/A.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This research involved human participants and received Slippery Rock University IRB approval.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Participants were instructed to read the following job advertisement. Depending on which condition they were randomly assigned, they received one of three versions. The only difference between this and the other versions was the pronouns used. *The bolded pronouns were either non-binary (as shown here), binary (e.g., “he or she”), or masculine (“he/him/his”).
Our workforce is continually growing and thriving. As such, we are currently seeking part-time employees. On average, 71% of our workforce is comprised of part-time (compared to full-time) employees. Those who are hired are typically enthusiastic and bright; we usually know a good employee when we see *them. We are always striving to maintain a work environment that emphasizes a family culture, friendly faces, and an enjoyable atmosphere. We want each worker to feel as though they have the ability to communicate their ideas. When it comes to approaching a difficult task at work, we recognize the benefits of taking a more non-conventional approach.
Our staff is busy throughout the workday. What this means is that they need to be able to work in a fast-paced and energetic environment. However, we certainly do not want a part-time employee’s workload to interfere with their other responsibilities. As a part-time employee, each worker will devote 5–20 h of their weekly schedule to working. Also, each worker can work 7.5 h in 1 day, but they cannot work anymore than that. We accommodate each employee’s schedule around their other responsibilities.
We expect full employee support in fulfilling our goal to maintain a positive experience for the people who visit our facilities. Therefore, on a particularly busy day an employee may be asked to perform additional tasks during their shift to help fellow employees. Naturally, they will be highly praised for being able to adapt to the situation.
Finally, we expect and praise our employees who work as a team. We believe in praising employees who assume teamwork qualities. When we come across an outstanding worker, we believe rewarding them will boost the morale of the team. A worker is typically very pleased when their hard work is praised and the more they are praised, the harder they work! If this work environment sounds like a good fit for you, we encourage you to apply!
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keener, E., Kotvas, K. Beyond He and She: Does the Singular Use of “They, Them, Their” Function Generically as Inclusive Pronouns for Cisgender Men and Women?. Gend. Issues 40, 23–43 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-022-09297-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-022-09297-8