Studies of attitudes toward sexist language have consistently revealed a gender gap, with women considerably more supportive of inclusive language than men. The present study investigated this gender gap in the presence of "attitudes toward women," a potential mediator variable. Participants were a convenience sample of 18-to 20-year-old college students (N = 278). Most were European American/White (87%) women (60%). Data were collected using the Modern Sexism Scale, Neosexism Scale, Attitudes Toward Women Scale, and Inventory of Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language-General. The customary gender gap in attitudes toward sexist language was found in this sample. Regression tests of mediation, however, revealed that when measures of attitudes toward women were included in the analysis, the gender effect diminished by as much as 61% (p < .01). These findings provide empirical evidence of a link between attitudes toward sexist language and the cultural construct, attitudes toward women.

A 3 (sport type) x 2 (gender) ANOVA (alpha = .05) with post hoc comparisons showed that athletes in contact and noncontact sports scored lower than those in collision sports. Females scored lower than males. A significant interaction revealed a greater gender difference in noncontact sports than in collision or contact. In noncontact sports, gender role expectations could be the dominant influence for males, while role expectations and in-sport behavioral norms influence females. In collision and contact sports, in-sport norms could reinforce role expectations for males but encourage females to demonstrate behaviors inconsistent with traditional expectations.Cette étude porte sur les perceptions de 162 athlètes universitaires de Division 1-A à l'égard de la légitimité de l'agression en sport. Des athlètes impliqués dans des sports de collision, de contact et de non-contact ont complété l'Inventaire du Comportement Sportif (Conroy, Silva, Newcomer, Walker et Johnson, sous presse). En général, les athlètes n'ont pas considéré l'agression comme légitime. Une analyse ANOVA 3(type de sport) x 2 (sexe) (alpha = .05) avec des comparaisons post hoc permet de démontrer que les athlètes en sports de contact ou de non-contact ont des scores plus faibles que ceux dans des sports de collision. Les femmes ont également eu des scores moins élevés que les hommes. Une interaction significative a révélé une différence de genre plus grande dans les sports de non-contact que dans les sports de contact ou de collision. Dans les sports de non-contact, les attentes reliées aux rôles sexuels pourraient être l'influence dominante pour les hommes, tandis que les attentes de rôle et les normes de comportement associées au sport pourraient influencer les femmes. Dans les sports de contact ou de collision, les normes de comportement associées au sport pourraient renforcer les attentes de rôle chez les hommes mais encourager les femmes à avoir des comportements contraires aux attentes traditionnelles.

No abstract

Past researchers have consistently demonstrated that female and male athletes receive differential treatment in the media: males are presented in ways that emphasize their physical/athletic ability, while females are portrayed in terms of their femininity and physical attractiveness. Researchers have concluded that this pattern of coverage is a manifestation of the social construction of gender difference and hierarchy in sport and thus serves a patriarchal agenda. However, a widely-held “common-sense” perception is that differential treatment occurs due to methodological inconsistencies related to prior research, rather than to media bias designed to devalue and disempower women. For example, in the past, researchers have examined different media types, sports, readerships and editorial policies. These methodological variations are frequently offered by various audiences (ranging from academicians to the general public) as alternative, competing explanations for differential coverage found in prior research. An example of competing explanation, grounded in methodological concerns, is the following: the difference in coverage is perceived to have occurred because one researcher examined professional tennis while another researcher focused on intercollegiate basketball. Implicit in this perception is the suggestion that different sport levels and types are responsible for differential coverage, not media bias. Controlling for methodological differences in previous research, the hermeneutic method was employed to analyze the written text of feature articles in the same magazine (Sports Illustrated), for the same year (1989), covering the same sport (professional tennis). Statements in the text that referred to female and male athletes were classified within a Performance Related Dimension (athletic ability, mental ability, strength of character) or a Non-Performance Related Dimension (emotions, physical appearance, personal life). In spite of tight methodological controls, a consistent pattern of gender difference and hierarchy was found throughout the feature articles. Implications of the study relative to future research that address consumers’ perceptions of media portrayals are presented.

This paper discusses three studies on changing people's attitudes toward sexist/nonsexist language. In Study 1, sport management students (N= 164) were asked how to persuade others to use nonsexist language. Many suggested education. Study 2 participants (N = 201) were asked if they had ever discussed sexist language in instructional settings. Analysis of their attitudes revealed an interaction between gender and instruction. Study 3 (N = 248) tested the effects of 3 types of instruction on student attitudes about sexist/nonsexist language. After a 50-minute intervention, Study 3 participants were generally undecided about sexist/nonsexist language, and their attitudes did not differ across instructional strategies (p > .01). In all conditions, males were significantly less receptive to nonsexist language than females (p < .01). This “gender gap” was magnified by a combination of direct and indirect instruction. Until more is known, the authors propose (a) modeling and (b) instruction grounded in empathy as initial strategies for teaching inclusive language.