对亲环境变化的性别态度:男性霸权认同、支配和威胁的作用

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
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":"对亲环境变化的性别态度:男性霸权认同、支配和威胁的作用","authors":"Robert A. T. Avery,&nbsp;Clara Kulich,&nbsp;Lumturie Thaqi,&nbsp;Aly M. A. M. K. Elbindary,&nbsp;Hind El Bouchrifi,&nbsp;Alexis N. J.-L. Favre,&nbsp;Simon Gmür,&nbsp;Sydney Hauke,&nbsp;Chloé I. A. Huete,&nbsp;Si Young Lee,&nbsp;Jérémy Nelson Miranda,&nbsp;Zacharie Mizeret,&nbsp;Pablo Palle,&nbsp;Hédi Razgallah,&nbsp;Léo Theytaz,&nbsp;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":"{\"title\":\"Gendered attitudes towards pro-environmental change: The role of hegemonic masculinity endorsement, dominance and threat\",\"authors\":\"Robert A. T. Avery,&nbsp;Clara Kulich,&nbsp;Lumturie Thaqi,&nbsp;Aly M. A. M. K. Elbindary,&nbsp;Hind El Bouchrifi,&nbsp;Alexis N. J.-L. Favre,&nbsp;Simon Gmür,&nbsp;Sydney Hauke,&nbsp;Chloé I. A. Huete,&nbsp;Si Young Lee,&nbsp;Jérémy Nelson Miranda,&nbsp;Zacharie Mizeret,&nbsp;Pablo Palle,&nbsp;Hédi Razgallah,&nbsp;Léo Theytaz,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

环境心理学中最有力的发现之一是,男性的环保意识比女性低。虽然这种差异通常归因于个性或身份过程,但似乎缺乏对潜在意识形态影响的实证研究。我们提出——并通过两项相关研究提供证据——激进的亲环境主义通常类似于挑战父权意识形态(如支配取向)原则的变革主张。由于男性比女性更倾向于支持父权意识形态,他们可能认为这些挑战更具威胁性,从而导致对亲环境变化的更大反对。与我们的假设一致,研究1 (N = 450,英国样本)显示,男性(与女性相比)对霸权男性气质的更大认可和对预期社会变革的威胁感知解释了他们对亲环境政策的更强烈拒绝。研究2 (N = 254,瑞士人法语区样本)表明,男性对霸权男性气质的认同程度更高,社会和生态优势取向更高,这可以解释他们比女性更容易感受到威胁。这些结果强调了霸权男性气概作为一种貌似合理的意识形态框架,可能会弥合之前的性别差距解释,并为政策制定者提供有关变革阻力的初步见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gendered attitudes towards pro-environmental change: The role of hegemonic masculinity endorsement, dominance and threat

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.

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
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
85
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.
×
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