Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Paternalistic and Envious Gender Stereotypes: Testing Predictions from the Stereotype Content Model

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In 2 studies, paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes were examined. Paternalistic stereotypes portray particular female or male subgroups as warm but not competent, whereas envious stereotypes depict some other female or male subgroups as competent but not warm. A total of 134 women and 82 men, primarily White and middle class, participated in this research. Building on the stereotype content model (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002), Study 1 tested the mixed-stereotypes hypothesis that many gender subgroups are viewed as high on either competence or warmth but low on the other. Study 2 additionally addressed the social-structural hypothesis that status predicts perceived competence and interdependence predicts perceived warmth. The results provided strong support for both hypotheses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Alexander, M. G., Brewer, M. B., & Herrmann, R. K. (1999). Images and affect: Afunctional analysis of out-group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 78-93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R. D. (1970). The problem of intergroup prejudice. In B. E. Collins (Ed.), Social psychology (pp. 245-296). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, F. K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 1-35). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benokraitis, N. V., & Feagin, J. R. (1995). Modern sexism: Blatant, subtle, and covert discrimination (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (1995). Prejudice: Its social psychology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S., & Trentham, S. (1998). Subtypes of women and men: Anew taxonomy and an exploratory categorical analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 679-696.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, S., & Trentham, S. (2001). Should we take “gender” out of gender subtypes? The effects of gender, evaluative valence, and context on the organization of person subtypes. Sex Roles, 45, 455-480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., Winton, W., Crowley, M., & Lewis, L. L. (1985). Level of categorization and content of gender stereotypes. Social Cognition, 3, 145-167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1986). Prejudice, discrimination, and racism: Historical trends and contemporary approaches. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 1-34). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41-113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A socialrole interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1994). Are people prejudiced against women? Some answers from research on attitudes, gender stereotypes, and judgments of competence. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 1-35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123-174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T. (1994). Explorations in gender cognition: Content and structure of female and male subtypes. Social Cognitio, 12, 37-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T. (1996). Linking female and male subtypes to situations: A range-of-situation-fit effect. Sex Roles, 35, 401-426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T. (1997). Geschlechterstereotype: Frau und Mann in sozialpsychologischer Sicht [Gender stereotypes: Woman and man in social psychological perspective]. Pfaffenweiler, Germany: Centaurus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T. (2001). Ambivalenter Sexismus und die Polarisierung von Geschlechterstereotypen [Ambivalent sexism and the polarization of gender stereotypes]. Zeitschrift f ür Sozialpsychologie, 32, 235-247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T., & Six-Materna, I. (1999). Hostilität und Benevolenz: Eine Skala zur Erfassung des ambivalenten Sexismus [Hostility and benevolence: Ascale measuring ambivalent sexism]. Zeitschrift f ür Sozialpsychologie, 30, 211-228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T., & Trautner, H. M. (2000). Developmental social psychology of gender: An integrative framework. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 3-32). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckes, T., Trautner, H. M., & Behrendt, R. (2002). Gender subgroups and intergroup perception: Adolescents' views of owngender and other-gender groups. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 357-411). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T. (2000a). Interdependence and the reduction of prejudice. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 115-135). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T. (2000b). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries: Evolution, culture, mind, and brain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 299-322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878-902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 473-489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Diebold, J., Bailey-Werner, B., & Zhu, L. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323-1334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119-135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999a). The Ambivalence toward Men Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 519-536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999b). Sexism and other “isms”: Interdependence, status, and the ambivalent content of stereotypes. In W. B. Swann Jr., J. H. Langlois & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor Spence (pp. 193-221). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001a). Anambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications of gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001b). Ambivalent sexism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 115-188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001c). Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: Differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 278-306). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763-775.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Hilt, L. (2000). Combative children to ambivalent adults: The development of gender prejudice. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 243-272). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. (1995). Cultural anthropology (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 657-674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kite, M. E. (2001). Changing times, changing gender roles: Who do we want women and men to be? In R. Unger (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender (pp. 215-227). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, T. K., & Zanna, M. P. (1998). Cross-dimension ambivalence toward social groups: Can ambivalence affect intentions to hire feminists? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 427-441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93-120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masser, B., & Abrams, D. (1999). Contemporary sexism: Relationships amonghostile sexism, benevolent sexism, and neosexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 503-517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, K. L., Park, B., & Rothbart, M. (1995). Subtyping versus subgrouping processes in stereotype representation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 812-824.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1985). An examination of procedures for determining the number of clusters in a data set. Psychometrika, 50, 159-179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1987). Methodology review: Clustering methods. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 329-354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oettingen, G. (Ed.). (1993). Deutschland Ost und Deutschland West [Germany East and Germany West; special issue]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 24(3).

  • Operario, D., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Stereotypes: Content, structures, processes, and context. In R. Brown & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 22-44). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, T. F. (1999). Gordon Willard Allport: A tribute. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 415-427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratto, F. (1996). Sexual politics: The gender gap in the bedroom, the cupboard, and the cabinet. In D. M. Buss & N. M. Malamuth (Eds.), Sex, power, conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives (pp. 179-230). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Z., & Hewstone, M. (2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 52-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, S., Nelson, C., & Vivekananthan, P. S. (1968). A multidimensional approach to the structure of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 283-294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 743-762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, D. J. (1973). Implicit personality theory: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 79, 294-309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Six, B., & Eckes, T. (1991). A closer look at the complex structure of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 24, 57-71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. E. (2000). Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 44-62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Stapp, J. (1974). The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: Ameasure of sex-role stereotypes and masculinity-femininity. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 43-44 (Ms. No. 617).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stangor, C., & Schaller, M. (1996). Stereotypes as individual and collectice representations. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 3-37). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., & Campbell, B. (2001). Sexism: Attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. In R. Brown & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 218-237). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vonk, R., & Olde-Monnikhof, M. (1998). Gender subgroups: Intergroup bias within the sexes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 37-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study (Rev. ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zebrowitz, L. A. (1996). Physical appearance as a basis of stereotyping. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 79-120). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Dresden, Germany

    Thomas Eckes

  2. TestDaF Institute, University of Hagen, Elberfelder Street 103, 58084, Hagen, Germany

    Thomas Eckes

Authors
  1. Thomas Eckes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eckes, T. Paternalistic and Envious Gender Stereotypes: Testing Predictions from the Stereotype Content Model. Sex Roles 47, 99–114 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021020920715

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021020920715

Search

Navigation