Benevolent sexism alters executive brain responses

Dardenne, Benoît; Dumont, Muriel; Sarlet, Marie; Phillips, Christophe; Balteau, Evelyne; Degueldre, Christian; Luxen, André; Salmon, Eric; Maquet, Pierre; Collette, Fabienne

doi:10.1097/wnr.0b013e3283625b5b

Cited by 32 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Women exposed to hostilely sexist treatment in the workplace experience lower job satisfaction and increased absenteeism, depression, and physical illness symptoms (Fitzgerald, ). Exposure to benevolently sexist treatment increases women's rumination, reduces their working memory capacity (Dardenne et al., ; Dardenne, Dumont, & Bollier, ), and negatively predicts their grade‐point average and self‐efficacy in college science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) classes (Kuchynka et al., ).…”

Section: System Justification Theory and Zero‐sum Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zero‐Sum Thinking and the Masculinity Contest: Perceived Intergroup Competition and Workplace Gender Bias

Kuchynka

Bosson

Vandello

et al. 2018

Journal of Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender‐based zero‐sum thinking reflects beliefs that women's status gains correspond directly with men's status losses. These beliefs may help explain people's resistance to gender equity. Here, two studies examined the association between men's zero‐sum thinking and workplace gender biases. In Study 1, men (N = 235) employed in workplaces with stronger masculinity contest norms reported observing stronger bias against women in the workplace, and this effect was mediated by an increase in their own zero‐sum thinking. In Study 2, college students (N = 269) read information that either threatened or affirmed the gender status hierarchy and then reported their zero‐sum thinking and their support for gender fair workplace policies that undermine the masculinity contest. Men, but not women, reduced support for gender fair policies following a gender hierarchy threat, and this effect was mediated by an increase in their zero‐sum thinking. Discussion considers the workplace policy implications of these findings.

show abstract

Section: System Justification Theory and Zero‐sum Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zero‐Sum Thinking and the Masculinity Contest: Perceived Intergroup Competition and Workplace Gender Bias

Kuchynka

Bosson

Vandello

et al. 2018

Journal of Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, exposure to benevolent sexism elicits a different set of responses including self-objectification, body shame (Calogero & Jost, 2011), and prolonged cardiovascular recovery (Salomon et al, 2015). Benevolent sexism also impairs women’s cognitive performance more than hostile sexism does (Dardenne, Dumont, & Bollier, 2007; Vescio, Gervais, Snyder, & Hoover, 2005) because it reduces working memory capacity by increasing intrusive thoughts about incompetence and by eliciting attempts to suppress these thoughts (Dardenne et al, 2007; Dardenne et al, 2013).…”

Section: Ambivalent Sexism Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Hostile and Benevolent Sexism and College Women’s STEM Outcomes

Kuchynka

Salomon

Bosson

et al. 2017

Psychology of Women Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined associations of perceived ambivalent sexism with women's outcomes in university Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses as a function of their STEM identity. Women (N ¼ 592) who varied in STEM identification reported on their personal experiences with benevolent and hostile sexism and indicated their STEM major intentions, STEM self-efficacy, and STEM grade point average (GPA). Women perceived more benevolent sexism (i.e., protective paternalism and complementary gender differentiation) than hostile sexism in STEM courses, and their STEM identity moderated the associations between sexism and STEM outcomes. Among weakly-identified (but not strongly-identified) women, protective paternalism predicted lower STEM major intentions, STEM self-efficacy, and STEM GPA; hostile sexism predicted lower STEM GPA. Male STEM students (N ¼ 163) reported more protective paternalism attitudes than hostile sexism attitudes, suggesting that women's perceptions were not without warrant. We discuss implications of these results for understanding women's underrepresentation in STEM and advise STEM educators to avoid well-intended, but paternalistic, messages that convey negative stereotypes about women's STEM competence.

show abstract

“…Several authors have precisely shown that the negative expectancy induced by social representations is most likely to impact tasks that tap the most into executive processes, i.e. high-level cognitive processes which permit regulation during goal-directed actions ( Croizet et al, 2004 ; Dardenne et al, 2013 ; Schmader & Johns, 2003 ; Schmader, Johns, & Forbes, 2008 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Self-Transcendence and Cognitive Processes in the Response Expectancy Effect

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuropsychological assessment is known to be influenced by expectancy effects, which can either enhance (placebo) or diminish (nocebo) cognitive performance. Research suggests that the response expectancy effect is influenced by various individual and situational factors and that the placebo effect results in an increase in monitoring processes as measured indirectly. However, the impact on monitoring processes has not yet been studied by direct measures such as Judgement Of Learning (JOL). This study aimed to investigate the response expectancy effect on various neuropsychological tasks, including a task that directly assesses monitoring capacities (JOL). In addition to determining which cognitive functions are influenced by the expectancy effect, this study examined the moderating role of the self-transcendence dimension of personality. Eighty healthy subjects were exposed to three bogus conditions presented as allegedly having a positive, negative, or no impact on cognitive capacities. Then they completed, in random order, three blocks of tasks (executive, attentional, and memory), one in each condition. Results showed an effect of negative instructions on flexibility (poorer performance) and memory (better performance) scores. Furthermore, positive instructions led to better explicit monitoring capacities (JOL) than the neutral condition. These effects were moderated by self-transcendence, as only participants with moderate or high self-transcendence exhibited these effects. Overall, our results showed that the response expectancy effect emerges from a combination of individual and cognitive factors.

show abstract

Benevolent sexism alters executive brain responses

Cited by 32 publications

References 11 publications

Zero‐Sum Thinking and the Masculinity Contest: Perceived Intergroup Competition and Workplace Gender Bias

Zero‐Sum Thinking and the Masculinity Contest: Perceived Intergroup Competition and Workplace Gender Bias

Hostile and Benevolent Sexism and College Women’s STEM Outcomes

The Role of Self-Transcendence and Cognitive Processes in the Response Expectancy Effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About