Robert A. T. Avery, Clara Kulich, Lumturie Thaqi, Aly M. A. M. K. Elbindary, Hind El Bouchrifi, Alexis N. J.-L. Favre, Simon Gmür, Sydney Hauke, Chloé I. A. Huete, Si Young Lee, Jérémy Nelson Miranda, Zacharie Mizeret, Pablo Palle, Hédi Razgallah, Léo Theytaz, Fabrizio Butera
{"title":"Gendered attitudes towards pro-environmental change: The role of hegemonic masculinity endorsement, dominance and threat","authors":"Robert A. T. Avery, Clara Kulich, Lumturie Thaqi, Aly M. A. M. K. Elbindary, Hind El Bouchrifi, Alexis N. J.-L. Favre, Simon Gmür, Sydney Hauke, Chloé I. A. Huete, Si Young Lee, Jérémy Nelson Miranda, Zacharie Mizeret, Pablo Palle, Hédi Razgallah, Léo Theytaz, Fabrizio Butera","doi":"10.1111/bjso.12834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One of the most robust findings in environmental psychology is that men report lower pro-environmentalism than women. Whilst this difference is often attributed to personality or identity processes, there seems to be a lack of empirical research on potential ideological influences. We propose—and provide evidence through two correlational studies—that radical pro-environmentalism is often akin to propositions of change that challenge tenets of patriarchal ideology such as dominance orientations. As men tend to endorse patriarchal ideologies more than women, they may perceive these challenges as more threatening, leading to greater opposition towards pro-environmental change. In line with our hypothesis, Study 1 (<i>N</i> = 450, UK sample) revealed that men's (vs. women's) greater endorsement of hegemonic masculinity and threat perceptions of anticipated social change accounted for their stronger rejection of pro-environmental policies. Study 2 (<i>N</i> = 254, Francophone Swiss sample) showed that men's greater endorsement of hegemonic masculinity, and higher social and ecological dominance orientation explained their higher perceptions of threat compared to women. These results highlight hegemonic masculinity as a plausible ideological framework likely to bridge previous gender gap explanations and provide policymakers with preliminary insights regarding resistance to change.</p>","PeriodicalId":48304,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12834","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
One of the most robust findings in environmental psychology is that men report lower pro-environmentalism than women. Whilst this difference is often attributed to personality or identity processes, there seems to be a lack of empirical research on potential ideological influences. We propose—and provide evidence through two correlational studies—that radical pro-environmentalism is often akin to propositions of change that challenge tenets of patriarchal ideology such as dominance orientations. As men tend to endorse patriarchal ideologies more than women, they may perceive these challenges as more threatening, leading to greater opposition towards pro-environmental change. In line with our hypothesis, Study 1 (N = 450, UK sample) revealed that men's (vs. women's) greater endorsement of hegemonic masculinity and threat perceptions of anticipated social change accounted for their stronger rejection of pro-environmental policies. Study 2 (N = 254, Francophone Swiss sample) showed that men's greater endorsement of hegemonic masculinity, and higher social and ecological dominance orientation explained their higher perceptions of threat compared to women. These results highlight hegemonic masculinity as a plausible ideological framework likely to bridge previous gender gap explanations and provide policymakers with preliminary insights regarding resistance to change.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Social Psychology publishes work from scholars based in all parts of the world, and manuscripts that present data on a wide range of populations inside and outside the UK. It publishes original papers in all areas of social psychology including: • social cognition • attitudes • group processes • social influence • intergroup relations • self and identity • nonverbal communication • social psychological aspects of personality, affect and emotion • language and discourse Submissions addressing these topics from a variety of approaches and methods, both quantitative and qualitative are welcomed. We publish papers of the following kinds: • empirical papers that address theoretical issues; • theoretical papers, including analyses of existing social psychological theories and presentations of theoretical innovations, extensions, or integrations; • review papers that provide an evaluation of work within a given area of social psychology and that present proposals for further research in that area; • methodological papers concerning issues that are particularly relevant to a wide range of social psychologists; • an invited agenda article as the first article in the first part of every volume. The editorial team aims to handle papers as efficiently as possible. In 2016, papers were triaged within less than a week, and the average turnaround time from receipt of the manuscript to first decision sent back to the authors was 47 days.