Kenneth S. Michniewicz

Gender dichotomization at the level of ingroup identity: what it is, and why men use it more than women.

In 5 studies (N = 756), we show that mens relative to womens gender ingroup identities are characterized by greater levels of gender dichotomization, a tendency to distance masculine from feminine traits. We demonstrate further that mens gender dichotomization is motivated, in part, by a need to eschew femininity from their ingroup identity to bolster a precarious gender status. Studies 1-3 establish and replicate the basic effect, and rule out alternative explanations (positivity, projection, status striving) for mens tendency to dichotomize more than women. Studies 4 and 5 demonstrate the motivated nature of gender dichotomization by establishing that men, but not women, dichotomize more strenuously when reminded of the precariousness of their gender status, and report stronger motivation to restore their gender status upon learning that their ingroup is becoming less dichotomized. Across 3 studies, strength of identification with their gender group moderates mens dichotomization tendencies. Discussion considers the implications of these findings for understanding the precarious nature of manhood and identifies practical applications of gender dichotomization in the interpersonal realm.

The attractive underdog: When disadvantage bolsters attractiveness

While intuition suggests and much research has shown that people are attracted to advantaged individuals, the present study explored the conditions under which people might be attracted to disadvantaged individuals. We hypothesized that perceiving someone as unfairly disadvantaged can motivate attributions of positive personal characteristics and, consequently, judgments of heightened attractiveness. Seventy-eight participants were randomly assigned to read about a job applicant facing a fair or an unfair application process resulting in a competitive advantage or disadvantage. In support of our hypothesis, participants judged unfairly disadvantaged applicants (i.e., underdogs) and fairly advantaged applicants as more physically attractive and suitable as dates compared with fairly disadvantaged and unfairly advantaged applicants. These results highlight the role of situational factors in judgments of one’s attractiveness.

Gender-Atypical Mental Illness as Male Gender Threat

The present study examined whether men view gender-atypical (i.e., feminine) psychological disorders as threats to their gender status. Men and women (N = 355) rated their expectations of gender status loss, feelings of distress, and help-seeking intentions in response to 10 different stereotypically masculine and feminine psychological disorders. Men as compared to women expected greater gender status loss for, and reported more distress to, gender-atypical versus gender-typical disorders. Expectations of gender status loss partially mediated the link between participant gender and distress at the thought of gender-atypical disorders. These findings suggest that feminine disorders pose more powerful gender status threats for men than masculine disorders do and that men’s expectations of gender status loss for feminine disorders drive their negative reactions to these mental illnesses. The discussion emphasizes the importance of considering the gender-typicality of disorders, and the implications of these findings for clinical interventions.