2021
DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000269
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of gender and male distinctiveness threat on prejudice against homosexuals.

Abstract: Positive distinctiveness threat is central for understanding ingroup bias, but its role in gender differences in the expression of sexual prejudice is not yet satisfactorily elucidated. We analyzed this issue by proposing that sexual prejudice is a defensive reaction to ensure intergroup distinctiveness, so that heterosexual men are more prejudiced against homosexuals than heterosexual women because they strive more for positive distinctiveness. In Study 1 (N = 232), we found that men exhibited more prejudice … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The present results align with the ingroup distinctiveness threat hypothesis based on social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), as well as with recent findings showing that distinctiveness threat is particularly important for heterosexual men (Vieira de Figueiredo & Pereira, 2021), and confirm that distinctiveness threat increases when a relevant outgroup is perceived as too similar to the ingroup (e.g., Jetten et al, 1996Jetten et al, , 1997Roccas & Schwartz, 1993). In this work, we relied on perceived stereotypicality as an indicator of the gay male character's prototypicality and perceived intergroup similarity, as the literature has demonstrated a link between stereotypicality and prototypicality (e.g., Blair et al, 2002), as well as between stereotypes, intergroup similarity, and distinctiveness (e.g., Gardner et al, 1994;Haslam et al, 1998;Lalonde, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The present results align with the ingroup distinctiveness threat hypothesis based on social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), as well as with recent findings showing that distinctiveness threat is particularly important for heterosexual men (Vieira de Figueiredo & Pereira, 2021), and confirm that distinctiveness threat increases when a relevant outgroup is perceived as too similar to the ingroup (e.g., Jetten et al, 1996Jetten et al, , 1997Roccas & Schwartz, 1993). In this work, we relied on perceived stereotypicality as an indicator of the gay male character's prototypicality and perceived intergroup similarity, as the literature has demonstrated a link between stereotypicality and prototypicality (e.g., Blair et al, 2002), as well as between stereotypes, intergroup similarity, and distinctiveness (e.g., Gardner et al, 1994;Haslam et al, 1998;Lalonde, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Such a prediction is supported by evidence that indicates that perceiving sexual orientation as discrete is associated with greater anti-gay prejudice 8 . On the other hand, a recent study found that when heterosexual men are exposed to information that blurs the distinction between themselves and homosexual men, they enact greater homophobia, to re-establish their distinctiveness 28 . Future research clarifying how continuous and fluid notions of sexual orientation impact sexual prejudice is therefore of the upmost importance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Contrary to our Hypotheses 2A, women appeared no more likely than men to report non-exclusive heterosexuality following exposure to informational accounts. At face value this is surprising given considerable evidence the female sexual orientation is more malleable than male sexual orientation 21 , 22 , 37 , and given that heterosexual men are likely to experience greater internal resistance 28 , and greater social backlash 24 , 30 , to adopting a non-exclusive heterosexual orientation. However, a closer look at Study 1 may explain why we did not observe gender differences in these effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These items tapped into a classic conceptualization of distinctiveness threat as arising from the perception that an outgroup is too similar to or not sufficiently distinct from the ingroup (Branscombe et al, 1999). Distinctiveness threat is typically manipulated by implying that an ingroup is highly similar to a comparison outgroup (Jetten et al, 1997, 2004; Plante et al, 2015; Spears et al, 1997; Vieira de Figueiredo & Pereira, 2021). Accordingly, we sought to assess the perception that transgender women are not considered or treated as sufficiently distinct from cisgender women.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%