1 / 11

The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males

The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males. Sarah Kemp & Ruth Hudgens Hanover College. Introduction. Differences in levels of Sexism between single-sex and co-educational high schools (Lee, Marks, & Byrd, 1994) Contact Hypothesis (Stephan, 1985)

rozalia
Download Presentation

The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males Sarah Kemp & Ruth Hudgens Hanover College

  2. Introduction • Differences in levels of Sexism between single-sex and co-educational high schools (Lee, Marks, & Byrd, 1994) • Contact Hypothesis (Stephan, 1985) 1. Equal Status 2. Personal Interaction 3. Achieve Goals through Cooperative Activities 4. Social Norms & Relevant Authorities

  3. Intro cont…. • Sex Role Attitudes: Egalitarian vs. Traditional (Vanyperen & Buunk, 1991) • Benevolent Sexism – Encompasses subjectively positive (for the sexist) attitudes toward women in traditional roles (Glick & Fiske, 1997)

  4. Hypotheses • Male subjects who attended co-educational high schools will display lower levels of benevolent sexism than those who attended single-sex high schools. • Male subjects who have more traditional sex role attitudes will display higher levels of benevolent sexism than males who have more egalitarian sex role attitudes.

  5. Method • Participants: students at a small liberal arts college in the Midwest *91 subjects: 58 females & 33 males • Subjects were recruited either individually or through Resident Assistants according to living unit

  6. Method-Materials • Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: 22-item Likert scale (0=strongly disagree/5=strongly agree) *Ex: “Women should be cherished and protected by men.” (Glick & Fiske, 1997) • Sex Role Attitudes Scale: 40-item Likert scale *Ex: “A Woman who pursues a career cannot be a good mother” • Demographics

  7. Procedure • Participant selection • Consent form • Survey – 15 minutes • Debriefing and contact information

  8. Results • Men from single-sex high schools did not show significantly higher levels of benevolent sexism than men from co-ed high schools (One-Way ANOVA= n.s.) • No correlation between men’s benevolent sexism and sex role attitude

  9. Results/ Discussion • Range of Benevolent Sexism was from 14 to 44: Women’s M=26.62, Men’s M=27.58 • Men were more egalitarian (M=100.06) than women (M=94.24), with a range of 75 to 150

  10. Discussion • Small Sample Size – not enough power • Homogeneity of small college • Conditions of contact hypothesis were not met by the high school • Sex role attitudes of campus women may not be egalitarian enough. • May have been obvious what our scale was measuring.

  11. Future Research • Larger, more diverse sample • Co-residential living units- more interaction with women • Questions concerning conditions of h.s.- contact hypothesis

More Related