Limits...
True gender ratios and stereotype rating norms.

Garnham A, Doehren S, Gygax P - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: In total, real world ratios for 290 occupations were obtained for our perceive vs. real world comparison, of which 205 were deemed to be unproblematic.The means for the two sources were similar and the correlation between them was high, suggesting that people are generally accurate at judging real gender ratios, though there were some notable exceptions.Beside this correlation, some interesting patterns emerged from the two sources, suggesting some response strategies when people complete norming studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, University of Sussex Brighton, UK.

ABSTRACT
We present a study comparing, in English, perceived distributions of men and women in 422 named occupations with actual real world distributions. The first set of data was obtained from previous a large-scale norming study, whereas the second set was mostly drawn from UK governmental sources. In total, real world ratios for 290 occupations were obtained for our perceive vs. real world comparison, of which 205 were deemed to be unproblematic. The means for the two sources were similar and the correlation between them was high, suggesting that people are generally accurate at judging real gender ratios, though there were some notable exceptions. Beside this correlation, some interesting patterns emerged from the two sources, suggesting some response strategies when people complete norming studies. We discuss these patterns in terms of the way real world data might complement norming studies in determining gender stereotypicality.

No MeSH data available.


Scatter plot of real gender ratios from current study against normative judgments from Misersky et al. (2014). The solid line is the line of best fit for all data.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4510832&req=5

Figure 1: Scatter plot of real gender ratios from current study against normative judgments from Misersky et al. (2014). The solid line is the line of best fit for all data.

Mentions: Figure 1 highlights the difference in the range of the ratios found in the two studies, as well as separately indicating the questionable and non-questionable ratios. Numerical values for all the ratios can be found in data sheet 1 in the supplementary material.


True gender ratios and stereotype rating norms.

Garnham A, Doehren S, Gygax P - Front Psychol (2015)

Scatter plot of real gender ratios from current study against normative judgments from Misersky et al. (2014). The solid line is the line of best fit for all data.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4510832&req=5

Figure 1: Scatter plot of real gender ratios from current study against normative judgments from Misersky et al. (2014). The solid line is the line of best fit for all data.
Mentions: Figure 1 highlights the difference in the range of the ratios found in the two studies, as well as separately indicating the questionable and non-questionable ratios. Numerical values for all the ratios can be found in data sheet 1 in the supplementary material.

Bottom Line: In total, real world ratios for 290 occupations were obtained for our perceive vs. real world comparison, of which 205 were deemed to be unproblematic.The means for the two sources were similar and the correlation between them was high, suggesting that people are generally accurate at judging real gender ratios, though there were some notable exceptions.Beside this correlation, some interesting patterns emerged from the two sources, suggesting some response strategies when people complete norming studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Psychology, University of Sussex Brighton, UK.

ABSTRACT
We present a study comparing, in English, perceived distributions of men and women in 422 named occupations with actual real world distributions. The first set of data was obtained from previous a large-scale norming study, whereas the second set was mostly drawn from UK governmental sources. In total, real world ratios for 290 occupations were obtained for our perceive vs. real world comparison, of which 205 were deemed to be unproblematic. The means for the two sources were similar and the correlation between them was high, suggesting that people are generally accurate at judging real gender ratios, though there were some notable exceptions. Beside this correlation, some interesting patterns emerged from the two sources, suggesting some response strategies when people complete norming studies. We discuss these patterns in terms of the way real world data might complement norming studies in determining gender stereotypicality.

No MeSH data available.