Sex Roles

, Volume 51, Issue 1–2, pp 17–27 | Cite as

Mere Exposure: Gender Differences in the Negative Effects of Priming a State of Self-Objectification

Article

Abstract

Objectification theory (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997) holds that American culture coaxes women to develop observers' views of their bodies. The present study was designed to test whether a state of self-objectification can be automatically activated by subtle exposure to objectifying words. A state of self-objectification or of bodily empowerment was primed by the use of a scrambled sentence task. Women's ratings of negative emotions were higher and their ratings of the appeal of physical sex lower when primed with self-objectification than when primed with body competence. Men's ratings were unaffected by the primes. The results of this study suggest that mere exposure to objectifying media can play a significant role in the initiation of a self-objectified state along with its attendant psychological consequences for women.

Gender objectification media priming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

references

  1. Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D. D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Faceism: Five studies of sex differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 725-735.Google Scholar
  2. Bargh, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 3-51). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  3. Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244.Google Scholar
  4. Bond, M. H., & Tak-Sing, C. (1983). College students' spontaneous self-concept: The effect of culture among respondents in Hong Kong, Japan, and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 14, 153-171.Google Scholar
  5. Bugental, J. F. T., & Zelen, S. L. (1950). Investigations into the self-concept: The W-A-Y technique. Journal of Personality, 18, 483-498.Google Scholar
  6. Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1997). Automatic activation of impression formation and memorization goals: Nonconscious goal priming reproduces effects of explicit task instructions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 464-478.Google Scholar
  7. Cousins, S. D. (1989). Culture and self-perception in Japan and the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 124-131.Google Scholar
  8. Crandall, C. S. (1994). Prejudice against fat people: Ideology and self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 882-894.Google Scholar
  9. Darwin, C. (1965). The expression of emotion in man and animals. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1872)Google Scholar
  10. Dion, K. L., Dion, K. K., & Keelan, J. P. (1990). Appearance anxiety as a dimension of social-evaluative anxiety: Exploring the ugly duckling syndrome. Contemporary Social Psychology, 14, 220-224.Google Scholar
  11. Fallon, A. E. (1990). Culture in the mirror: Sociocultural determinants of body image. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body images: Development, deviance, and change (pp. 80-109). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  12. Fallon, A. E., & Rozin, P. (1985). Sex differences in perception of desirable body shape. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 94, 102-105.Google Scholar
  13. Fredrickson, B. L., Noll, S. M., Roberts, T. A., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269-284.Google Scholar
  14. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173-206.Google Scholar
  15. Gapinski, K. D., Brownell, K. D., & LaFrance, M. (2003). Body objectification and “fat talk”: Effects on emotion, motivation, and cognitive performance. Sex Roles, 48, 377-388.Google Scholar
  16. Goldenberg, J. L., Pyszczynski, T., McCoy, S. K., Greenberg, J., & Solomon, S. (1999). Death, sex, love and neuroticism: Why is sex such a problem? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1173-1187.Google Scholar
  17. Haidt, J., Rozin, P., McCauley, C. R., & Imada, S. (1997). Body, psyche, and culture: The relationship between disgust and morality. Psychology and Developing Societies, 9, 107-131.Google Scholar
  18. Hamilton, K., & Waller, G. (1993). Media influences on body size estimation in anorexia and bulimia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 837-840.Google Scholar
  19. Heiman, J. R., & Verhulst, J. (1982). Gender and sexual functioning. In I. Al-tssa (Ed.), Gender and psychopathology (pp. 305-320). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Jacoby, S. (1988, August 23). Appearance anxiety. New York Times Magazine, pp. 26, 77.Google Scholar
  21. Kittler, J. E. (2003). Print media exposure as a predictor of disordered eating: The role of self-objectification, body shame, and appearance responsibility. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section B, 64, 967.Google Scholar
  22. Kuhn, M. H., & McPartland, T. S. (1954). An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. American Sociological Review, 19, 68-76.Google Scholar
  23. Lewis, M. (1992). Shame: The exposed self. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  24. Malkin, A. R., Wornian, K., & Chrisler, J. C. (1999). Women and weight: Gendered messages on magazine covers. Sex Roles, 40, 647-655.Google Scholar
  25. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1970). Human sexual inadequacy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  26. McKinley, N. M. (1998). Gender differences in undergraduates' body esteem: The mediating effect of objectified body consciousness and actual/ideal weight discrepancy. Sex Roles, 39, 113-123.Google Scholar
  27. McKinley, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181-215.Google Scholar
  28. Miller, W. I. (1997). The anatomy of disgust. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Noll, S. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame, and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 623-636.Google Scholar
  30. Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-anaylsis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29-51.Google Scholar
  31. Pope, H. G., Katz, D. L., & Hudson, J. I. (1993). Anorexia nervosa and “reverse anorexia” among 108 male bodybuilders. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 34, 406-409.Google Scholar
  32. Posovac, H. D., Posovac, S. S., & Posovac, E. J. (1998). Exposure to media images of female attractiveness and concern with body weight among young women. Sex Roles, 38, 187-201.Google Scholar
  33. Quinn, D. M., & Crocker, J. (1999). When ideology hurts: Effects of belief in the Protestant ethic and feeling overweight on the psychological well-being of women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 402-414.Google Scholar
  34. Roberts, T.-A., Goldenberg, J. M., Power, C., & Pyszczynski, T. (2002). “Feminine protection”: The effects of menstruation on attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 131-139.Google Scholar
  35. Rozin, P., & Fallon, A. E. (1987). A perspective on disgust. Psychological Review, 94, 23-41.Google Scholar
  36. Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community,autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 574-586.Google Scholar
  37. Srull, T. K., & Wyer, R. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.Google Scholar
  38. Solely, L. C., & Kurzbard, G. (1986). Sex in advertising: A comparison of 1964 and 1984 magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 15, 46-64.Google Scholar
  39. Sommers-Flanagan, R., Sommers-Flanagan, J., & Davis, B. (1993). What's happening on music television? A gender role content analysis. Sex Roles, 28, 745-755.Google Scholar
  40. Spitzer, B. L., Henderson, K. A., & Zivian, M. T. (1999). Gender differences in population versus media body sizes: A comparison over four decades. Sex Roles, 40, 545-565.Google Scholar
  41. Tangney, J. P. (1993). Shame and guilt. In C. G. Costello (Ed.), Symptoms of depression (pp. 161-180). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  42. Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1256-1269.Google Scholar
  43. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). Obesity still on the rise. Retrieved from www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/press/archive/obesity_10_2002.htmGoogle Scholar
  44. Vaughan, K. K., & Fouts, G. T. (2003). Changes in magazine and television exposure and eating disorder symptomatology. Sex Roles, 49, 313-320.Google Scholar
  45. Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101, 34-52.Google Scholar
  46. Winkler, M. G., & Cole, L. B. (1994). The good body. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Wright, J. C., & Huston, A. C. (1983). A matter of form: Potentials of television for young viewers. American Psychologist, 38, 835-843.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyColorado CollegeColorado Springs

Personalised recommendations