Laurie A. Rudman

Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: the role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance.

Social and economic sanctions for counterstereotypical behavior have been termed the backlash effect. The authors present a model of the role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance from the standpoint of both perceivers and actors. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants lost a competition to either atypical or typical men or women and subsequently showed greater tendency to sabotage deviants. Moreover, undermining deviants was associated with increased self-esteem, suggesting that backlash rewards perceivers psychologically. Experiment 3 showed that gender deviants who feared backlash resorted to strategies designed to avoid it (e.g., hiding, deception, and gender conformity). Further, perceivers who sabotaged deviants (Experiment 2) or deviants who hid their atypicality (Experiment 3) estimated greater stereotyping on the part of future perceivers, in support of the models presumed role for backlash in stereotype maintenance. The implications of the findings for cultural stereotypes are discussed.

Sources of Implicit Attitudes

Response latency measures have yielded an explosion of interest in implicit attitudes. Less forthcoming have been theoretical explanations for why they often differ from explicit (self-reported) attitudes. Theorized differences in the sources of implicit and explicit attitudes are discussed, and evidence consistent with each theory is presented. The hypothesized causal influences on attitudes include early (even preverbal) experiences, affective experiences, cultural biases, and cognitive consistency principles. Each may influence implicit attitudes more than explicit attitudes, underscoring their conceptual distinction.

Implicit and Explicit Attitudes Toward Female Authority

Attitudes toward female authority and their relationship to gender beliefs were examined using implicit and explicit measures of each. Implicit attitudes covaried with implicit gender authority beliefs (i.e., linking men to high-authority and women to low-authority roles). Explicit attitudes covaried with explicit gender authority beliefs, feminist identification, and hostile sexism. Thus, gender authority beliefs may influence both conscious and unconscious prejudice against female authorities. Although women showed less explicit prejudice than did men, their implicit attitudes were similarly negative. Finally, the relationship found between two different response latency methods (a priming task for attitudes, a categorization task for beliefs) supports the assumption that implicit measures assess similar constructs (i.e., automatic associations in long-term memory).

Implicit Self-Concept and Evaluative Implicit Gender Stereotypes: Self and Ingroup Share Desirable Traits:

Experiment 1 unexpectedly found sex differences in evaluative gender stereotypes (only men associated male with potency and only women associated female with warmth). Experiment 2 dramatically reduced sex differences in gender-potency judgments when measures were redesigned to avoid implying that potency was positive (the concepts, strong and weak, were represented by evaluatively matched words; e.g., destroy vs. feeble, loud vs. quiet, and mighty vs. gentle). Experiment 3 tested the hypothesis that these sex differences were in the service of self-esteem but found no correlation between own-gender-favorable stereotyping and implicit self-esteem. Rather, participants showed a correlation between linking self to the favorable potency trait and linking own gender to that trait. Experiment 4 confirmed the correlation between implicit self-concept and gender stereotype using the contrast between potency and warmth for the implicit stereotype measure. In concert, results suggest that people possess implicit gender stereotypes in self-favorable form because of the tendency to associate self with desirable traits.

Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: why do women like women more than men like men?

Four experiments confirmed that womens automatic in-group bias is remarkably stronger than mens and investigated explanations for this sex difference, derived from potential sources of implicit attitudes (L. A. Rudman, 2004). In Experiment 1, only women (not men) showed cognitive balance among in-group bias, identity, and self-esteem (A. G. Greenwald et al., 2002), revealing that men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic own group preference. Experiments 2 and 3 found pro-female bias to the extent that participants automatically favored their mothers over their fathers or associated male gender with violence, suggesting that maternal bonding and male intimidation influence gender attitudes. Experiment 4 showed that for sexually experienced men, the more positive their attitude was toward sex, the more they implicitly favored women. In concert, the findings help to explain sex differences in automatic in-group bias and underscore the uniqueness of gender for intergroup relations theorists.

COMPETENT YET OUT IN THE COLD: SHIFTING CRITERIA FOR HIRING REFLECT BACKLASH TOWARD AGENTIC WOMEN

We present evidence that shifting hiring criteria reflects backlash toward agentic (“masterful”) women (Rudman, 1998). Participants (N = 428) evaluated male or female agentic or communal managerial applicants on dimensions of competence, social skills, and hireability. Consistent with past research, agentic women were perceived as highly competent but deficient in social skills, compared with agentic men. New to the present research, social skills predicted hiring decisions more than competence for agentic women; for all other applicants, competence received more weight than social skills. Thus, evaluators shifted the job criteria away from agentic womens strong suit (competence) and toward their perceived deficit (social skills) to justify hiring discrimination. The implications of these findings for womens professional success are discussed.

Implicit self-esteem compensation : Automatic threat defense

Four experiments demonstrated implicit self-esteem compensation (ISEC) in response to threats involving gender identity (Experiment 1), implicit racism (Experiment 2), and social rejection (Experiments 3-4). Under conditions in which people might be expected to suffer a blow to self-worth, they instead showed high scores on 2 implicit self-esteem measures. There was no comparable effect on explicit self-esteem. However, ISEC was eliminated following self-affirmation (Experiment 3). Furthermore, threat manipulations increased automatic intergroup bias, but ISEC mediated these relationships (Experiments 2-3). Thus, a process that serves as damage control for the self may have negative social consequences. Finally, pretest anxiety mediated the relationship between threat and ISEC (Experiment 3), whereas ISEC negatively predicted anxiety among high-threat participants (Experiment 4), suggesting that ISEC may function to regulate anxiety. The implications of these findings for automatic emotion regulation, intergroup bias, and implicit self-esteem measures are discussed.

Implicit Romantic Fantasies and Women's Interest in Personal Power: A Glass Slipper Effect?

Three experiments investigated the relationship between womens romantic fantasies and their interest in personal power. Romantic fantasies (associating partners with chivalry and heroism) were assessed using the Implicit Association Test and self-reports. In each experiment, womens implicit romantic fantasies were dissociated with their conscious beliefs. More important, implicit (but not explicit) romantic fantasies negatively predicted womens interest in personal power, including projected income, education goal, interest in high-status jobs, and group leadership appeal. By contrast, mens implicit romantic fantasies were not routinely linked to their interest in personal power. In concert, the findings are consistent with positing a “glass slipper” effect for women that may be an implicit barrier to gender equity.

Of Animals and Objects Men’s Implicit Dehumanization of Women and Likelihood of Sexual Aggression

Although dehumanizing women and male sexual aggression are theoretically aligned, the present research provides the first direct support for this assumption, using the Implicit Association Test to assess two forms of female dehumanization: animalization and objectification. In Study 1, men who automatically associated women more than men with primitive constructs (e.g., animals, instinct, nature) were more willing to rape and sexually harass women, and to report negative attitudes toward female rape victims. In Study 2, men who automatically associated women with animals (e.g., animals, paw, snout) more than with humans scored higher on a rape-behavioral analogue, as well as rape proclivity. Automatically objectifying women by associating them with objects, tools, and things was also positively correlated with men’s rape proclivity. In concert, the research demonstrates that men who implicitly dehumanize women (as either animals or objects) are also likely to sexually victimize them.

Implicit and Explicit Consequences of Exposure to Violent and Misogynous Rap Music

In two experiments, primed subjects were exposed to violent and misogynistic rap music and control subjects were exposed to popular music. Experiment 1 showed that violent and misogynistic rap music increased the automatic associations underlying evaluative racial stereotypes in high and low prejudiced subjects alike. By contrast, explicit stereotyping was dependent on priming and subjects’ prejudice level. In Experiment 2, the priming manipulation was followed by a seemingly unrelated person perception task in which subjects rated Black or White targets described as behaving ambiguously. As expected, primed subjects judged a Black target less favorably than a White target. By contrast, control subjects rated Black and White targets similarly. Subjects’ level of prejudice did not moderate these findings, suggesting the robustness of priming effects on social judgments.