Occupational Stereotyping: Individual Differences in Susceptibility and in Response to Training.

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Eimear Finnegan, Alan Garnham, Jane Oakhill
{"title":"Occupational Stereotyping: Individual Differences in Susceptibility and in Response to Training.","authors":"Eimear Finnegan, Alan Garnham, Jane Oakhill","doi":"10.1177/17470218261482047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In previous studies, we investigated the effects of training on the reduction of occupational stereotypes indicated by responses to the question of whether two words (e.g. <i>uncle/builder</i> or <i>aunt/builder</i>) could refer to the same person. In each study, we also collected individual difference measures of sexism, sexist language, sex typing, and fear of negative evaluation. Considering the individual studies, the relations between the individual difference measures and measures of stereotyping were either absent or not consistent and were not reported in the published versions of the studies. In this paper, we analyse data from 299 participants across 8 studies in an attempt to identify consistent patterns. We looked at five individual difference measures (Ambivalent Sexism Inventory [ASI], Inventory of Attitudes towards Sexist and Non-sexist Language General [IASNL-G], Bem Sex Role Inventory, Ethics Questionnaire, Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation) and four measures of performance: initial differences in speed and accuracy of responding to stereotypically congruent (nurse-aunt) and incongruent (nurse-uncle) word pairs and changes in those differences with training. We found that one individual difference measure, the ASI, predicted differences on both initial performance and response to training, though unexpectedly people with high sexism scores were more, not less, susceptible to training. Scores on a second measure, The IASNL-G was also predictive but made no contribution to either speed or accuracy in addition to that of ASI scores. We discuss the implications of these results and their relation to previous literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218261482047"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218261482047","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In previous studies, we investigated the effects of training on the reduction of occupational stereotypes indicated by responses to the question of whether two words (e.g. uncle/builder or aunt/builder) could refer to the same person. In each study, we also collected individual difference measures of sexism, sexist language, sex typing, and fear of negative evaluation. Considering the individual studies, the relations between the individual difference measures and measures of stereotyping were either absent or not consistent and were not reported in the published versions of the studies. In this paper, we analyse data from 299 participants across 8 studies in an attempt to identify consistent patterns. We looked at five individual difference measures (Ambivalent Sexism Inventory [ASI], Inventory of Attitudes towards Sexist and Non-sexist Language General [IASNL-G], Bem Sex Role Inventory, Ethics Questionnaire, Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation) and four measures of performance: initial differences in speed and accuracy of responding to stereotypically congruent (nurse-aunt) and incongruent (nurse-uncle) word pairs and changes in those differences with training. We found that one individual difference measure, the ASI, predicted differences on both initial performance and response to training, though unexpectedly people with high sexism scores were more, not less, susceptible to training. Scores on a second measure, The IASNL-G was also predictive but made no contribution to either speed or accuracy in addition to that of ASI scores. We discuss the implications of these results and their relation to previous literature.

表达:职业刻板印象-易感性和对培训反应的个体差异。
在之前的研究中(Finnegan, 2014; Finnegan et al., 2015a, 2015b, 2023),我们通过回答两个词(例如,uncle/builder或aunt/builder)是否可以指同一个人的问题,调查了培训对职业刻板印象减少的影响。在每项研究中,我们还收集了性别歧视、性别歧视语言、性别类型和对负面评价的恐惧的个体差异测量。考虑到个体研究,个体差异测量和刻板印象测量之间的关系要么不存在,要么不一致,在已发表的研究版本中没有报告。在本文中,我们分析了8项研究中299名参与者的数据,试图找出一致的模式。我们观察了五种个体差异测量(ASI, ISANL-G, BSRI, EthicsQ, BFoNE)和四种表现测量:对刻板印象一致(护士-阿姨)和不一致(护士-叔叔)词对的反应速度和准确性的初始差异以及这些差异随着训练的变化。我们发现,一项个体差异测量,即矛盾性别歧视量表(ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996),预测了初始表现和对培训反应的差异,尽管出乎意料的是,性别歧视得分高的人更容易(而不是更少)接受培训。第二项测量的分数,对性别歧视和非性别歧视语言的态度清单(IASNL-G; Parks & Roberton, 2000)也具有预测性,但除了ASI分数外,对速度或准确性都没有贡献。我们将讨论这些结果的含义及其与先前文献的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书