性别的主观意义:调查设计如何影响对女性气质和男性气质的看法

IF 2 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Elias Markstedt, Lena Wängnerud, Maria Solevid, Monika Djerf-Pierre
{"title":"性别的主观意义:调查设计如何影响对女性气质和男性气质的看法","authors":"Elias Markstedt, Lena Wängnerud, Maria Solevid, Monika Djerf-Pierre","doi":"10.1332/251510820x15978605298709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rationale for this study is that self-categorising rating scales are becoming increasingly popular in large-scale survey research moving beyond binary ways of measuring gender. We are referring here to the use of rating scales that are similar to graded scales capturing left–right\n or liberal–conservative political ideology, that is, scales that do not include predefinitions of the core concepts (femininity/masculinity, as compared to left/right or liberal/conservative). Yet, previous studies including such non-binary gender measures have paid little attention\n to potential effects of survey designs. Using an experimental set-up, we are able to show that sequencing of gender measurements influences the answers received. Men were especially affected by our treatments and rated themselves as significantly ‘less masculine’ when prompted\n to reason about the meaning of gender prior to self-categorisation on scales measuring degrees of femininity and masculinity. Moreover, self-categorising seems to trigger more biological understandings of gender than anticipated in theory.","PeriodicalId":36315,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Politics and Gender","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The subjective meaning of gender: how survey designs affect perceptions of femininity and masculinity\",\"authors\":\"Elias Markstedt, Lena Wängnerud, Maria Solevid, Monika Djerf-Pierre\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/251510820x15978605298709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The rationale for this study is that self-categorising rating scales are becoming increasingly popular in large-scale survey research moving beyond binary ways of measuring gender. We are referring here to the use of rating scales that are similar to graded scales capturing left–right\\n or liberal–conservative political ideology, that is, scales that do not include predefinitions of the core concepts (femininity/masculinity, as compared to left/right or liberal/conservative). Yet, previous studies including such non-binary gender measures have paid little attention\\n to potential effects of survey designs. Using an experimental set-up, we are able to show that sequencing of gender measurements influences the answers received. Men were especially affected by our treatments and rated themselves as significantly ‘less masculine’ when prompted\\n to reason about the meaning of gender prior to self-categorisation on scales measuring degrees of femininity and masculinity. Moreover, self-categorising seems to trigger more biological understandings of gender than anticipated in theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Politics and Gender\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Politics and Gender\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/251510820x15978605298709\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Politics and Gender","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/251510820x15978605298709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

这项研究的基本原理是,自分类评定量表在大规模调查研究中变得越来越流行,超越了测量性别的二元方法。我们在这里指的是使用与捕捉左右或自由-保守政治意识形态的分级量表类似的评分量表,也就是说,量表不包括核心概念的预先定义(与左/右或自由/保守相比,女性气质/男性气质)。然而,以往的研究,包括这种非二元性别措施,很少关注调查设计的潜在影响。使用实验设置,我们能够显示性别测量的顺序影响收到的答案。男性尤其受到我们治疗的影响,当他们在测量女性气质和男性气质程度的量表上进行自我分类之前,被要求对性别的含义进行推理时,他们认为自己明显“不那么男性化”。此外,自我分类似乎引发了比理论上预期更多的对性别的生物学理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The subjective meaning of gender: how survey designs affect perceptions of femininity and masculinity
The rationale for this study is that self-categorising rating scales are becoming increasingly popular in large-scale survey research moving beyond binary ways of measuring gender. We are referring here to the use of rating scales that are similar to graded scales capturing left–right or liberal–conservative political ideology, that is, scales that do not include predefinitions of the core concepts (femininity/masculinity, as compared to left/right or liberal/conservative). Yet, previous studies including such non-binary gender measures have paid little attention to potential effects of survey designs. Using an experimental set-up, we are able to show that sequencing of gender measurements influences the answers received. Men were especially affected by our treatments and rated themselves as significantly ‘less masculine’ when prompted to reason about the meaning of gender prior to self-categorisation on scales measuring degrees of femininity and masculinity. Moreover, self-categorising seems to trigger more biological understandings of gender than anticipated in theory.
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
European Journal of Politics and Gender
European Journal of Politics and Gender Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
9.50%
发文量
38
×
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