MAN-HATING FEMINISTS? Feminists and Stereotype Threat: Attitudes Toward Men

1. MAN-HATING FEMINISTS?Feminists and Stereotype Threat: Attitudes Toward Men LouAnne B. Hawkins & F. Dan Richard University of North Florida

2. Stereotype Threat an individual’s perceived risk of confirming as self-characteristic a negative stereotype of the individual’s group(Steele & Aronson, 1995).

3. Effect of stereotype threat grounded in three principles: (Aronson, Quinn, and Spencer, 1998) 1. Negative stereotypes threaten self-esteem. 2. Threats to self-esteem affect performance.The distress and anxiety associated with stigmatization may deter academic performance (Howard & Hammond, 1985; S. Steele, 1990). 3. Chronic threat results in disidentification from the domain being assessed.Individuals who fear they may perform in a way that confirms a stereotype of a group to which they belong may disengage from the domain in an effort to protect their self-esteem (Aronson, Blanton, & Cooper, 1995; Major, Spencer, Schmader, Wolfe, & Crocker, 1998; Steele, 1997).

4. The concern over being stereotyped may be particularly powerful for individuals who identify strongly with a domain that is central to their self-image and the stereotype. Women tend to be more vested in feminist consciousness (Henderson-King & Zhermer, 2003).

5. Consequences of Stereotype Threat In an effort to protect their self-esteem, individuals may disidentify or disengage from the threatened attribute after continual exposure to a negative stereotype (see Steele, 1997; Steele & Aronson, 1995). A Feminist Convention

6. Problem The effects of stereotype threat have been well-documented in academic and sports performance, but how pervasive are the effects of stereotype threat. Is it possible that stereotype threat may effect attitudes as well as performance?

7. Hypothesis Feminist participants in the stereotype threat condition will report more positive attitudes toward men than will traditional and moderate participants in the stereotype threat condition and all participants in the no threat condition.

8. Method • Participants • 105 female undergraduates • Ranged in age from 18 to 50 (M = 23.57, SD = 6.94). • White 75%, Black 14%, Hispanic 5%, Asian 2%, Other 4% Treated in accordance with American Psychological Association Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct .

9. Design Independent or Predictor Variables: Conditions: Feminist Prime Non-Primed (Control) Randomly assigned Feminism Criterion Variables: Attitudes Toward Men

10. Operational Definitions Feminism Neosexism Scale 11-item self-report instrument e.g., “In a fair employment system, men and women would be considered equal.” 5-point Likert type scale Higher scores = greater feminism Attitudes Toward Men Attitudes Toward Men Scale 32-item self-report instrument e.g. “Most fathers want very much to be close to their children.” 5-point Likert type scale Higher scores = more positive attitudes toward men

11. Results of Planned Contrast Analysis F(1,95) = 7.48 p < .01

12. Conclusions As predicted, feminist participants in the stereotype threat condition reported more positive attitudes toward men than did traditional and moderate participants in the stereotype threat condition and all participants in the no threat condition.

13. Discussion The effects of stereotype threat have been well-documented in academic performance. This study suggests that stereotype threat may influence reported attitudes as well. Additional research is needed to determine how pervasive the effects of stereotype threat may be. If stereotype threat consistently influences attitudes, certain individuals or organizations could use stereotype threat as a means of persuasion.