Limits...
Man, You Might Look Like a Woman-If a Child Is Next to You.

Brielmann AA, Gaetano J, Stolarova M - Adv Cogn Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: If such social contextual information was provided in the first rather than the second block of the experiment, subsequent female gender attributions increased for adult figures shown alone.Additionally, female gender attributions for actively helping relative to passive adults were made more often.Thus, we provide strong evidence that gender categorization can be altered by social context even if the subject of gender categorization remains identical.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology and Zukunftskolleg, University of Konstanz, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Gender categorization seems prone to a pervasive bias: Persons about whom or ambiguous gender information is available are more often considered male than female. Our study assessed whether such a male-bias is present in non-binary choice tasks and whether it can be altered by social contextual information. Participants were asked to report their perception of an adult figure's gender in three context conditions: (1) alone, (2) passively besides a child, or (3) actively helping a child (n = 10 pictures each). The response options male, female and I don't know were provided. As a result, participants attributed male gender to most figures and rarely used the I don't know option in all conditions, but were more likely to attribute female gender to the same adult figure if it was shown with a child. If such social contextual information was provided in the first rather than the second block of the experiment, subsequent female gender attributions increased for adult figures shown alone. Additionally, female gender attributions for actively helping relative to passive adults were made more often. Thus, we provide strong evidence that gender categorization can be altered by social context even if the subject of gender categorization remains identical.

No MeSH data available.


Mean difference between the proportion of male and female responses(a, c) and mean proportion of I don’t knowresponses (b, d) on the y axis for each context condition on thex axis in Experiment 1 (top) and the controlExperiment 2 (bottom). Gray shading marks conditions that were shownin the first block of each experiment. Cat’s eyes represent 95%within-subject CI s. Non-overlapping CIs indicate meaningfuldifferences between conditions. Dots mark magnitude of thesedifferences; ••d >> 1.00, •d > 0.50.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4591517&req=5

Figure 3: Mean difference between the proportion of male and female responses(a, c) and mean proportion of I don’t knowresponses (b, d) on the y axis for each context condition on thex axis in Experiment 1 (top) and the controlExperiment 2 (bottom). Gray shading marks conditions that were shownin the first block of each experiment. Cat’s eyes represent 95%within-subject CI s. Non-overlapping CIs indicate meaningfuldifferences between conditions. Dots mark magnitude of thesedifferences; ••d >> 1.00, •d > 0.50.

Mentions: Figure 3a displays the mean differencein proportions of male and female attributions with their within-subject CIsfor each condition. As all of these CIs lay meaningfully above zero, a clearmale-bias was evident in all three context conditions. As indicated by theCIs of differences not overlapping zero in the left half of Table 2, the presence of a childmodulated the magnitude of difference between the amount of male and femaleresponses: The likelihood with which male attributions were more frequentthan female attributions was greater for pictures showing an adult alonecompared to both social passive and social helping pictures byd = 1.07 and d = 1.25, respectively.Additionally, the male-bias was more strongly reduced in social helpingcompared to social passive context conditions, albeit to a lesser degree,d = 0.21.


Man, You Might Look Like a Woman-If a Child Is Next to You.

Brielmann AA, Gaetano J, Stolarova M - Adv Cogn Psychol (2015)

Mean difference between the proportion of male and female responses(a, c) and mean proportion of I don’t knowresponses (b, d) on the y axis for each context condition on thex axis in Experiment 1 (top) and the controlExperiment 2 (bottom). Gray shading marks conditions that were shownin the first block of each experiment. Cat’s eyes represent 95%within-subject CI s. Non-overlapping CIs indicate meaningfuldifferences between conditions. Dots mark magnitude of thesedifferences; ••d >> 1.00, •d > 0.50.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4591517&req=5

Figure 3: Mean difference between the proportion of male and female responses(a, c) and mean proportion of I don’t knowresponses (b, d) on the y axis for each context condition on thex axis in Experiment 1 (top) and the controlExperiment 2 (bottom). Gray shading marks conditions that were shownin the first block of each experiment. Cat’s eyes represent 95%within-subject CI s. Non-overlapping CIs indicate meaningfuldifferences between conditions. Dots mark magnitude of thesedifferences; ••d >> 1.00, •d > 0.50.
Mentions: Figure 3a displays the mean differencein proportions of male and female attributions with their within-subject CIsfor each condition. As all of these CIs lay meaningfully above zero, a clearmale-bias was evident in all three context conditions. As indicated by theCIs of differences not overlapping zero in the left half of Table 2, the presence of a childmodulated the magnitude of difference between the amount of male and femaleresponses: The likelihood with which male attributions were more frequentthan female attributions was greater for pictures showing an adult alonecompared to both social passive and social helping pictures byd = 1.07 and d = 1.25, respectively.Additionally, the male-bias was more strongly reduced in social helpingcompared to social passive context conditions, albeit to a lesser degree,d = 0.21.

Bottom Line: If such social contextual information was provided in the first rather than the second block of the experiment, subsequent female gender attributions increased for adult figures shown alone.Additionally, female gender attributions for actively helping relative to passive adults were made more often.Thus, we provide strong evidence that gender categorization can be altered by social context even if the subject of gender categorization remains identical.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology and Zukunftskolleg, University of Konstanz, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Gender categorization seems prone to a pervasive bias: Persons about whom or ambiguous gender information is available are more often considered male than female. Our study assessed whether such a male-bias is present in non-binary choice tasks and whether it can be altered by social contextual information. Participants were asked to report their perception of an adult figure's gender in three context conditions: (1) alone, (2) passively besides a child, or (3) actively helping a child (n = 10 pictures each). The response options male, female and I don't know were provided. As a result, participants attributed male gender to most figures and rarely used the I don't know option in all conditions, but were more likely to attribute female gender to the same adult figure if it was shown with a child. If such social contextual information was provided in the first rather than the second block of the experiment, subsequent female gender attributions increased for adult figures shown alone. Additionally, female gender attributions for actively helping relative to passive adults were made more often. Thus, we provide strong evidence that gender categorization can be altered by social context even if the subject of gender categorization remains identical.

No MeSH data available.