List all Project Mentors & Advisor(s)
Dr. Jana Hackathorn
Presentation Format
Poster Presentation
Abstract/Description
"Woman on Woman Aggression": Predictors of Beliefs in Double Sex Standards
The presence of double standards is a topic that has been widely researched for the past several decades. Sexual double standards are based on the belief that sexual behaviors by women are viewed differently than when similar behaviors are exhibited by men. Early research stated that double standards were no longer much of an issue as seen in archival research by Crawford and Popp (2003). As they pulled research from previous decades, they concluded that double standards were not much of an issue in the 1970’s but resurfaced a decade later. This is not to say that double standards were not present, but rather that they were not as prevalent. Researchers have posed questions on where the idea of double standards originate or what causes them. Marks and Fraley (2006) theorized that confirmation bias plays a role in the double standards that many persons exhibit. They felt that anecdotal rather than theoretical evidence supported the idea of a double standard through confirmation bias. Other researchers have drawn on these ideas and have theorized that some women may contribute to confirmation bias with their outward behaviors and attitudes about themselves. Zalkman and Marks (2014) brought ambivalent sexism to the forefront of their studies. They felt that the goal of present research should be to determine whether and to what extent sexism among persons moderates the exhibition of the sexual double standard. Their work approaches double standard research with this new element of sexism and opens up new avenues in which to research.
By utilizing the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996) and a researcher created scale based on Paynter’s Sexual Double Standards Scale (2013), the question of if there is a positive correlation between the presence of a sexist attitude, either hostile or benevolent, and higher levels of a sexual double standard was able to be tested. It is our hope that this will further the research of Zalkman and Marks (2014) and shed light on newly hypothesized areas regarding double standards, where they are formed, and how they shape our perceptions. The research looked at the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1988), Belief in a Just World Scale (BJW; Dalbert, 1998), Social Dominance Orientation (SDO; Sidanious & Pratto, 1999), and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis, 1983). These scales allowed exploration into alternate factors that may contribute to the belief in double standards. With a better understanding of double standards and sexism, we can better understand other social issues such as bias, prejudice, and intolerance.
The current research project focused on college age women and the interactions between levels of sexist beliefs and the presence of a sexual double standards against other women. Further research projects will follow to include a larger age population and will include men. It was hypothesized that there is a positive correlation between high levels of sexism and the belief in double standards among individuals. We also examined the relationship between double standards and sexism with the subscales hostile and benevolent. We also looked at the aforementioned variables that were collected to look for additional correlations that may be present. The overall model is significant F (3, 70) = 6.81, p < .001, R2 = .23. When we controlled for personality variables benevolent sexism and personal distress predicted double standard beliefs. However our end finding found that hostile sexism was the only significant predictor (B= .25, t= 2.01, p= .049), personal distress was not significant (B = .18, t = 1.47, p = .146), nor was benevolent sexism (B = .15, t = 1.21, p = .232).
Location
Small Ballroom, Curris Center
Start Date
April 2016
End Date
April 2016
"Women on Women Aggression" Predictors of a Belief in Double Standards
Small Ballroom, Curris Center
"Woman on Woman Aggression": Predictors of Beliefs in Double Sex Standards
The presence of double standards is a topic that has been widely researched for the past several decades. Sexual double standards are based on the belief that sexual behaviors by women are viewed differently than when similar behaviors are exhibited by men. Early research stated that double standards were no longer much of an issue as seen in archival research by Crawford and Popp (2003). As they pulled research from previous decades, they concluded that double standards were not much of an issue in the 1970’s but resurfaced a decade later. This is not to say that double standards were not present, but rather that they were not as prevalent. Researchers have posed questions on where the idea of double standards originate or what causes them. Marks and Fraley (2006) theorized that confirmation bias plays a role in the double standards that many persons exhibit. They felt that anecdotal rather than theoretical evidence supported the idea of a double standard through confirmation bias. Other researchers have drawn on these ideas and have theorized that some women may contribute to confirmation bias with their outward behaviors and attitudes about themselves. Zalkman and Marks (2014) brought ambivalent sexism to the forefront of their studies. They felt that the goal of present research should be to determine whether and to what extent sexism among persons moderates the exhibition of the sexual double standard. Their work approaches double standard research with this new element of sexism and opens up new avenues in which to research.
By utilizing the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996) and a researcher created scale based on Paynter’s Sexual Double Standards Scale (2013), the question of if there is a positive correlation between the presence of a sexist attitude, either hostile or benevolent, and higher levels of a sexual double standard was able to be tested. It is our hope that this will further the research of Zalkman and Marks (2014) and shed light on newly hypothesized areas regarding double standards, where they are formed, and how they shape our perceptions. The research looked at the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR; Paulhus, 1988), Belief in a Just World Scale (BJW; Dalbert, 1998), Social Dominance Orientation (SDO; Sidanious & Pratto, 1999), and Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI; Davis, 1983). These scales allowed exploration into alternate factors that may contribute to the belief in double standards. With a better understanding of double standards and sexism, we can better understand other social issues such as bias, prejudice, and intolerance.
The current research project focused on college age women and the interactions between levels of sexist beliefs and the presence of a sexual double standards against other women. Further research projects will follow to include a larger age population and will include men. It was hypothesized that there is a positive correlation between high levels of sexism and the belief in double standards among individuals. We also examined the relationship between double standards and sexism with the subscales hostile and benevolent. We also looked at the aforementioned variables that were collected to look for additional correlations that may be present. The overall model is significant F (3, 70) = 6.81, p < .001, R2 = .23. When we controlled for personality variables benevolent sexism and personal distress predicted double standard beliefs. However our end finding found that hostile sexism was the only significant predictor (B= .25, t= 2.01, p= .049), personal distress was not significant (B = .18, t = 1.47, p = .146), nor was benevolent sexism (B = .15, t = 1.21, p = .232).