人称代词和人的感知——成对和非二元代词会引起规范性的性别偏见吗?

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Emma A. Renström, Anna Lindqvist, Amanda Klysing, Marie Gustafsson Sendén
{"title":"人称代词和人的感知——成对和非二元代词会引起规范性的性别偏见吗?","authors":"Emma A. Renström,&nbsp;Anna Lindqvist,&nbsp;Amanda Klysing,&nbsp;Marie Gustafsson Sendén","doi":"10.1111/bjop.12686","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research on gender-fair language aims to identify language inclusive to a multitude of individuals, for example, increasing the visibility of women by using paired pronouns (he/she) instead of generic masculine forms (he). However, binary presentations like he/she might come with unwanted side effects and evoke what we label as normative gender bias. A normative gender bias is defined as when words lead to stronger associations with individuals with normative gender expressions than with individuals with non-normative gender expressions, thus contributing to making non-normative individuals invisible. In three experiments, we compared the extent to which the paired pronoun he/she (Swedish and English), the neo-pronouns <i>hen</i> (Swedish), <i>ze</i> (English), and the generic pronoun singular they (English) evoked a normative gender bias. Swedish- (<i>N</i> = 219 and 268) and English- (<i>N</i> = 837, from the UK) speaking participants read about individuals referred to with the paired pronoun he/she or with hen, ze, or they. In Experiment 1 (Swedish), there was no main effect of condition on a normative bias, but in Experiment 2 (Swedish), the paired pronouns he/she evoked normative gender bias while hen did not. In Experiment 3 (English), both ze and singular they evoked normative gender bias, although normative associations were lower in these conditions compared to he/she. Furthermore, the normative bias was lower among participants who had knowledge about the use of ze as a nonbinary pronoun. Finally, neither ze nor they evoked a normative gender bias when their use was explicitly stated to be nonbinary. A potential explanation for why singular they did not generally result in less normative associations, despite almost all participants knowing about it, may include its more common use as a generic pronoun. Taken together, our results suggest that neo-pronouns, but not paired pronouns, have the potential to evoke less normative associations, but that they must be both (1) actively created new words and (2) well-known to language users as nonbinary pronouns.</p>","PeriodicalId":9300,"journal":{"name":"British journal of psychology","volume":"115 2","pages":"253-274"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjop.12686","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Personal pronouns and person perception – Do paired and nonbinary pronouns evoke a normative gender bias?\",\"authors\":\"Emma A. Renström,&nbsp;Anna Lindqvist,&nbsp;Amanda Klysing,&nbsp;Marie Gustafsson Sendén\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bjop.12686\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Research on gender-fair language aims to identify language inclusive to a multitude of individuals, for example, increasing the visibility of women by using paired pronouns (he/she) instead of generic masculine forms (he). However, binary presentations like he/she might come with unwanted side effects and evoke what we label as normative gender bias. A normative gender bias is defined as when words lead to stronger associations with individuals with normative gender expressions than with individuals with non-normative gender expressions, thus contributing to making non-normative individuals invisible. In three experiments, we compared the extent to which the paired pronoun he/she (Swedish and English), the neo-pronouns <i>hen</i> (Swedish), <i>ze</i> (English), and the generic pronoun singular they (English) evoked a normative gender bias. Swedish- (<i>N</i> = 219 and 268) and English- (<i>N</i> = 837, from the UK) speaking participants read about individuals referred to with the paired pronoun he/she or with hen, ze, or they. In Experiment 1 (Swedish), there was no main effect of condition on a normative bias, but in Experiment 2 (Swedish), the paired pronouns he/she evoked normative gender bias while hen did not. In Experiment 3 (English), both ze and singular they evoked normative gender bias, although normative associations were lower in these conditions compared to he/she. Furthermore, the normative bias was lower among participants who had knowledge about the use of ze as a nonbinary pronoun. Finally, neither ze nor they evoked a normative gender bias when their use was explicitly stated to be nonbinary. A potential explanation for why singular they did not generally result in less normative associations, despite almost all participants knowing about it, may include its more common use as a generic pronoun. Taken together, our results suggest that neo-pronouns, but not paired pronouns, have the potential to evoke less normative associations, but that they must be both (1) actively created new words and (2) well-known to language users as nonbinary pronouns.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British journal of psychology\",\"volume\":\"115 2\",\"pages\":\"253-274\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjop.12686\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British journal of psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12686\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjop.12686","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对性别公平语言的研究旨在识别对众多个体具有包容性的语言,例如,通过使用成对代词(他/她)而不是通用的男性形式(他)来增加女性的知名度。然而,像他/她这样的二元表现可能会带来不必要的副作用,并引发我们称之为规范的性别偏见。规范性性别偏见的定义是,当词汇导致与规范性性别表达的个体的联系比与非规范性性别表达的个体的联系更强时,从而有助于使非规范性个体隐形。在三个实验中,我们比较了成对代词he/she(瑞典语和英语)、新代词hen(瑞典语)、ze(英语)和一般代词单数they(英语)在多大程度上引起了规范的性别偏见。在瑞典语(219人和268人)和英语(837人,来自英国)中,说英语的参与者阅读了用代词he/she或hen、ze或they连用的个人。在实验1(瑞典语)中,条件对规范性偏见没有主效应,但在实验2(瑞典语)中,他/她的成对代词引起了规范性性别偏见,而母鸡没有。在实验3(英语)中,“ze”和“单数”都诱发了规范性的性别偏见,尽管这些条件下的规范性关联比“他/她”低。此外,在了解ze作为非二元代词使用的参与者中,规范偏差较低。最后,当他们的使用被明确地声明为非二元性时,他们和ze都没有引起规范的性别偏见。尽管几乎所有的参与者都知道单数they,但单数they通常不会产生不那么规范的联想,一个潜在的解释可能包括它作为一般代词的更常见用法。综上所述,我们的研究结果表明,新代词,而不是成对代词,有可能引起不太规范的联想,但它们必须同时(1)积极创造新词和(2)为语言使用者所熟知的非二元代词。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Personal pronouns and person perception – Do paired and nonbinary pronouns evoke a normative gender bias?

Personal pronouns and person perception – Do paired and nonbinary pronouns evoke a normative gender bias?

Research on gender-fair language aims to identify language inclusive to a multitude of individuals, for example, increasing the visibility of women by using paired pronouns (he/she) instead of generic masculine forms (he). However, binary presentations like he/she might come with unwanted side effects and evoke what we label as normative gender bias. A normative gender bias is defined as when words lead to stronger associations with individuals with normative gender expressions than with individuals with non-normative gender expressions, thus contributing to making non-normative individuals invisible. In three experiments, we compared the extent to which the paired pronoun he/she (Swedish and English), the neo-pronouns hen (Swedish), ze (English), and the generic pronoun singular they (English) evoked a normative gender bias. Swedish- (N = 219 and 268) and English- (N = 837, from the UK) speaking participants read about individuals referred to with the paired pronoun he/she or with hen, ze, or they. In Experiment 1 (Swedish), there was no main effect of condition on a normative bias, but in Experiment 2 (Swedish), the paired pronouns he/she evoked normative gender bias while hen did not. In Experiment 3 (English), both ze and singular they evoked normative gender bias, although normative associations were lower in these conditions compared to he/she. Furthermore, the normative bias was lower among participants who had knowledge about the use of ze as a nonbinary pronoun. Finally, neither ze nor they evoked a normative gender bias when their use was explicitly stated to be nonbinary. A potential explanation for why singular they did not generally result in less normative associations, despite almost all participants knowing about it, may include its more common use as a generic pronoun. Taken together, our results suggest that neo-pronouns, but not paired pronouns, have the potential to evoke less normative associations, but that they must be both (1) actively created new words and (2) well-known to language users as nonbinary pronouns.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British journal of psychology
British journal of psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.50%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Psychology publishes original research on all aspects of general psychology including cognition; health and clinical psychology; developmental, social and occupational psychology. For information on specific requirements, please view Notes for Contributors. We attract a large number of international submissions each year which make major contributions across the range of psychology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信