Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Anne M. Koenig is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Anne M. Koenig.


Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | 2004

Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis

Alice H. Eagly; Amanda B. Diekman; Mary C. Johannesen-Schmidt; Anne M. Koenig

This research examined the proposition that differential role occupancy by women and men fosters gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes. Analyses of the General Social Survey (J. A. Davis & T. W. Smith, 1998) and a community sample showed that women, more than men, endorsed policies that are socially compassionate, traditionally moral, and supportive of equal rights for women and for gays and lesbians. To clarify the sources of these gaps, the research examined (a) similarities between gender gaps and gaps associated with other respondent attributes such as race and parenthood, (b) interactions between respondent sex and other attributes, (c) the temporal patterning of gender gaps, and (d) the mediation of attitudinal gender gaps by 3 ideological variables--commitment to equality, group-based dominance, and conservatism versus liberalism.


Archive | 2006

Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities: Implication for Prosocial Behavior.

Alice H. Eagly; Anne M. Koenig

Contents: Preface. Part I: Framing Sex Differences and Similarities. K. Dindia, Men Are From North Dakota, Women Are From South Dakota. E. Aries, Gender Differences in Interaction: A Reexamination. P.H. Wright, Toward an Expanded Orientation to the Comparative Study of Womens and Mens Same-Sex Friendships. J.A. Hall, How Big Are Nonverbal Sex Differences? The Case of Smiling and Nonverbal Sensitivity. G.N. Powell, L.M. Graves, Gender and Leadership: Perceptions and Realities. M. Allen, K.S. Valde, Researching a Gendered World: The Intersection of Methodological and Ethical Concerns. Part II: Approaches to Sex Differences and Similarities. P.A. Anderson, The Evolution of Biological Sex Differences in Communication. B.R. Burleson, A.W. Kunkel, Revisiting the Different Cultures Thesis: An Assessment of Sex Differences and Similarities in Supportive Communication. A.H. Eagly, A.M. Koenig, Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities: Implication for Prosocial Behavior. M. Crawford, M.R. Kaufman, Sex Differences Versus Social Processes in the Construction of Gender. L. Di Mare, V.R. Waldron, Researching Gendered Communication in Japan and the United States: Current Limitations and Alternative Approaches. Part III: Sex Differences and Similarities in Communicative Behaviors. A. Mulac, The Gender-Linked Language Effect: Do Language Differences Really Make a Difference? L.K. Guerrero, S.M. Jones, R.R. Boburka, Sex Differences in Emotional Communication. J.K. Burgoon, J.P. Blair, D.B. Buller, P. Tilley, Sex Differences in Presenting and Detecting Deceptive Messages. A.E. Lindsey, W.R. Zakahi, Perceptions of Men and Women Departing From Conversational Sex-Role Stereotypes. P.J. Kalbfleisch, A.L. Herold, Sex, Power, and Communication. Part IV: Sex Differences and Similarities in Romantic Relationships. M.R. Trost, J.K. Alberts, How Men and Women Communicate Attraction: An Evolutionary View. P.A. Mongeau, M.C.M. Serewicz, M.L.M. Henningsen, K.L. Davis, Sex Differences in the Transition to a Heterosexual Romantic Relationship. D.J. Canary, J. Wahba, Do Women Work Harder Than Men at Maintaining Relationships? L.M. Sagrestano, C.L. Heavey, A. Christensen, Individual Differences Versus Social Structural Approaches to Explaining Demand-Withdraw and Social Influence Behaviors. J.T. Wood, Gender, Power, and Violence in Heterosexual Relationships. J.S. Hyde, Epilogue.


Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin | 2009

Incidental Experiences of Regulatory Fit and the Processing of Persuasive Appeals

Anne M. Koenig; Joseph Cesario; Daniel C. Molden; Spee Kosloff; E. Tory Higgins

This article examines how the subjective experiences of “feeling right” from regulatory fit and of “feeling wrong” from regulatory non-fit influence the way people process persuasive messages. Across three studies, incidental experiences of regulatory fit increased reliance on source expertise and decreased resistance to counterpersuasion, whereas incidental experiences of regulatory non-fit increased reliance on argument strength and increased resistance to counterpersuasion. These results suggest that incidental fit and non-fit experiences can produce, respectively, more superficial or more thorough processing of persuasive messages. The mechanisms underlying these effects, and the conditions under which they should and should not be expected, are discussed.


Basic and Applied Social Psychology | 2014

Extending Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice to Men and Women With Sex-Typed Mental Illnesses

Anne M. Koenig; Alice H. Eagly

We tested role congruity theory, which states that prejudice arises from an incongruity between group stereotypes and role characteristics, by assessing prejudice toward men and women with a masculine or feminine mental illness. Across two studies, participants acting as a vocational counselor rated the suitability of each target individual in each role. Men and individuals with a masculine sex-typed illness were more suitable for agentic roles, whereas women and individuals with a feminine sex-typed illness were more suitable for communal roles. In addition, sex and mental illness sex-type were better predictors of prejudice than evaluations of the group.


Frontiers in Psychology | 2018

Comparing Prescriptive and Descriptive Gender Stereotypes about Children, Adults, and the Elderly

Anne M. Koenig

Gender stereotypes have descriptive components, or beliefs about how males and females typically act, as well as prescriptive components, or beliefs about how males and females should act. For example, women are supposed to be nurturing and avoid dominance, and men are supposed to be agentic and avoid weakness. However, it is not clear whether people hold prescriptive gender stereotypes about children of different age groups. In addition, research has not addressed prescriptive gender stereotypes for the elderly. The current research measured prescriptive gender stereotypes for children, adults, and elderly men and women in 3 studies to (a) compare how prescriptive gender stereotypes change across age groups and (b) address whether stereotypes of males are more restrictive than stereotypes of females. Students (Studies 1 and 2) and community members (Study 3), which were all U.S. and majority White samples, rated how desirable it was for different target groups to possess a list of characteristics from 1 (very undesirable) to 9 (very desirable). The target age groups included toddlers, elementary-aged, adolescent, young adult, adult, and elderly males and females. The list of 21 characteristics was created to encompass traits and behaviors relevant across a wide age range. In a meta-analysis across studies, prescriptive stereotypes were defined as characteristics displaying a sex difference of d > 0.40 and an average rating as desirable for positive prescriptive stereotypes (PPS) or undesirable for negative proscriptive stereotypes (NPS) for male or females of each age group. Results replicated previous research on prescriptive stereotypes for adults: Women should be communal and avoid being dominant. Men should be agentic, independent, masculine in appearance, and interested in science and technology, but avoid being weak, emotional, shy, and feminine in appearance. Stereotypes of boys and girls from elementary-aged to young adults still included these components, but stereotypes of toddlers involved mainly physical appearance and play behaviors. Prescriptive stereotypes of elderly men and women were weaker. Overall, boys and men had more restrictive prescriptive stereotypes than girls and women in terms of strength and number. These findings demonstrate the applicability of prescriptive stereotypes to different age groups.


Psychological Bulletin | 2011

Are Leader Stereotypes Masculine? A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms

Anne M. Koenig; Alice H. Eagly; Abigail A. Mitchell; Tiina Ristikari


Sex Roles | 2005

Stereotype Threat in Men on a Test of Social Sensitivity

Anne M. Koenig; Alice H. Eagly


Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | 2014

Evidence for the social role theory of stereotype content: observations of groups' roles shape stereotypes.

Anne M. Koenig; Alice H. Eagly


Beyond Common Sense: Psychological Science in the Courtroom | 2008

Gender Prejudice: on the Risks of Occupying Incongruent Roles

Alice H. Eagly; Anne M. Koenig


Social Psychology | 2010

The Contextual Endorsement of Sexblind Versus Sexaware Ideologies

Anne M. Koenig; Jennifer A. Richeson

Collaboration


Dive into the Anne M. Koenig's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Abigail A. Mitchell

Nebraska Wesleyan University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joseph Cesario

Michigan State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge