Navigating Public Prejudices: The Impact of Media and Attitudes on High-Profile Female Political Leaders /Michèle M. Schlehofer & Bettina J. Casad & Michelle C. Bligh & Angela R. Grotto;Published online: 18 May 2011

write detailed and thorough annotations that summarize and evaluate those sources. Use the “Annotation Requirements” section on the next page to write the annotations. Each annotation should be no more than 1 page single-spaced. ORIGINAL ARTICLE Navigating Public Prejudices: The Impact of Media and Attitudes on High-Profile Female Political Leaders Michèle M. Schlehofer & Bettina J. Casad & Michelle C. Bligh & Angela R. Grotto Published online: 18 May 2011 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011 Abstract Predictions from the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske et al. 2002) that suggest high-status career women are perceived as competent but cold were tested with a sample of college students in California (N=294; 51% female; M age=21.49). Participants completed measures of sexism and attitude extremity, read a positive or negative article about a female senator, and rated her warmth and competence. Results indicate positive media coverage counteracts the competent but cold prediction of the SCM. In the context of negative media, extreme hostile sexism predicted evaluations of low warmth and competence; however, males with less extreme sexist attitudes had greater warmth and competence evaluations. Results are discussed in relation to the SCM and worldview confirmation hypothesis. Keywords Sexism . Stereotype content model . Female politicians .Worldview confirmation Introduction …in democracies in the television age, female leaders also have to navigate public prejudices – and these make democratic politics far more challenging for a woman than for a man. – Nicholas D. Kristof, The New York Times, February 10, 2008 (para.4) …can a female candidate even afford to be likable, without compromising the need to appear tough and competent? – Jocelyn Noveck, Associated Press, January 10, 2008 (para. 3) As the opening quotations suggest, female political leaders must walk a fine line if they are to be wellreceived by the voting public: they must be simultaneously perceived as competent and likeable, and these two perceptions may conflict. For social beings, forming impressions, evaluations, and attributions of other people are common, automatic, and fundamental processes (e.g., Ferguson and Zayas 2009; Heider 1958). In line with Noveck’s (2008) assessment of what would constitute a favorable perception of Hillary Clinton, research with the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske et al. 2002; Fiske et al. 1999; Glick and Fiske 1999, 2001) indeed suggests that M. M. Schlehofer (*) Department of Psychology, Salisbury University, 1101 Camden Ave., Salisbury, MD 21801, USA e-mail: [email protected] B. J. Casad Psychology and Sociology Department, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, 3801 West Temple Avenue, Pomona, CA 91768, USA e-mail: [email protected] M. C. Bligh Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, 123 E. Eighth St., Claremont, CA 91711, USA e-mail: [email protected] A. R. Grotto Psychology Department, Baruch College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York, One Bernard Baruch Way, New York, NY 10010, USA e-mail: [email protected] Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 DOI 10.1007/s11199-011-9965-9 two universal and cross-cultural dimensions on which we judge others are warmth (or likeability) and competence (Abele et al. 2008; Cuddy et al. 2008; Fiske et al. 2007). This study tests the SCM (Fiske et al. 1999, 2002) with a sample of college students residing in California to predict evaluations of a specific target: a female senator. In contrast to prior research, which has focused on societal perceptions, we use experimental methodology to apply the SCM to predict individuals’ perceptions of the female senator’s warmth and competence. Although using a U.S. sample, this study is of potential relevance in cross-cultural settings, as the SCM has been applied cross-culturally (e.g., Cuddy et al. 2009; Eckes 2002). According to the SCM, judgments of a person’s warmth and competence are affected by two distinct factors: 1) the perceived status of the target’s social group (high or low) determines evaluations of competence; 2) whether the target’s social group is perceived as being in competition with the dominant social group determines evaluations of warmth. For instance, career women, as part of a high status group in society, may be perceived as competent; however, because they are also female, and thus perceived as being in competition with the dominant gender group, they may also be simultaneously evaluated as cold and unlikeable (Eckes 2002). In contrast, groups that have low status in society, such as stay-at-home mothers, may be perceived as incompetent, but because they are not in competition with the dominant group and therefore are less threatening, are more likely to be perceived as warm and likeable (Cuddy et al. 2004; Eckes 2002). In line with prior research with male and female subgroups (Eckes 2002), female senators, as part of a high status group (politicians), should be perceived as generally competent, yet unlikeable. The SCM has been empirically validated with both student and nonstudent samples representing a diverse range of ages and U.S. locations (Fiske et al. 2002) as well as countries around the world, including individualist and collectivist cultures (Cuddy et al. 2009; Eckes 2002). The SCM has also been successfully applied to numerous social stereotypes regarding race, gender, occupation, ethnicity, employment status, socioeconomic status, nationality, religion, gender subgroups, and others (Cuddy et al. 2009; Eckes 2002; Fiske and Cuddy 2006; Fiske et al. 2002). The primary methodology used to test the SCM asks respondents to indicate, “As viewed by most Americans…,” how a variety of social groups would be rated on the dimensions of warmth, competence, status, and competition (Fiske et al. 1999, 2002). However, only a few studies (Cuddy et al. 2004; Cuddy et al. 2005; Masser et al. 2007) have asked respondents to report on personal perceptions of the social group’s warmth, competence, status, and competition. One such study using Australian college students (Masser et al. 2007) applied the SCM to predict evaluations of pregnant women applying for masculine-type and feminine-type short-term positions. Masser et al.’s (2007) findings suggest that shifting standards were used to evaluate pregnant women, suggesting mixed support for the ability of the SCM to predict individual perceptions. Our study differs from and extends work by Masser et al. (2007) and others using the SCM to predict individual perceptions, as we have included questions to assess participants’ own attitudes toward the group in question (here, women) and focus on the effect of contextual information about the target. It is critical for researchers to determine whether stereotype content is supported at both the group and individual levels (Devine and Elliot 1995). It also is important to test theoretical models within specific contexts to better understand their utility and application (Casper et al. 2010; van Rijswijk and Ellemers 2002). Understanding the utility of the SCM to predict judgments of individuals is important not only theoretically, but also for understanding under what conditions high-status career women can avoid being perceived as competent but unlikeable. Female Politicians and Media Messages Female political leaders spend considerable time in the media spotlight, and thus media messages about them might have an important influence on how warm and competent they are perceived. There is no doubt that the media has a strong priming effect on the public’s attitudes and opinions in the political realm (see Malhotra and Krosnick 2007 for a critical review of this literature); this has been explored in robust literatures on framing and agenda setting. Framing is the most subtle of these persuasive influences, and is defined as the process through which some aspects of reality are selected and made more salient in a communicating text, “in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described” (Entman 1993, p. 52). Framing can unobtrusively affect which considerations individuals weigh when contemplating political issues, and as such mass media can profoundly influence public opinion even without any overt attempt at persuasion or manipulation (see Nelson et al. 1997 for an overview). In addition to the subtler impact of framing, other research has focused on the impact of agenda setting and issue focus in prime time television (Holbrook and Hill 2005; Iyengar et al. 1984) and political ads (Valentino et al. 2002; see also Rogers and Dearing 1988). U.S.-based laboratory and survey research suggests that the news media prime citizens by influencing which policy domains voters use to judge political candidates (e.g., Iyengar and Kinder 1987; Krosnick and Kinder 1990) and that 70 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 differential levels of coverage may impact candidate evaluations (the so-called ‘dosage hypothesis’; see Malhotra and Krosnick 2007). Malhotra and Krosnick (2007) found no evidence of a linear relationship between amount of coverage and candidate evaluations, suggesting that the conditions under which priming impacts voter evaluations should be examined more closely in future research. Not only does media commentary help people determine their attitudes on political issues and what issues are important (Domke et al. 1999; Domke et al. 1998; Hester and Gibson 2003; Iyengar and Kinder 1987; Kiousis 2003; Krosnick and Brannon 1993; Krosnick and Kinder 1990; McCombs and Reynolds 2002; McCombs and Shaw 1972), it also influences evaluations of specific politicians (Iyengar et al. 1984; Krosnick and Kinder 1990; Miller and Krosnick 2000; Pan and Kosicki 1997; Stoker 1993). For example, Krosnick and Kinder (1990) compared the public’s opinion of President Ronald Reagan before and after the Iran-Contra issue, a significant event with extensive media coverage. While public evaluation of President Reagan before the Iran-Contra issue depended on his performance with domestic affairs, public evaluation after depended on people’s assessment of his handling of foreign affairs. Similarly, Hetherington (1996) provides evidence that higher levels of media consumption during the 1992 campaign caused Americans to view national economic conditions as being worse, which decreased their likelihood of voting for President George H. W. Bush. Given the media’s framing (Nelson et al. 1997) and agenda setting influences on attitudes (Holbrook and Hill 2005), and ability to influence perceptions of specific politicians (Miller and Krosnick 2000), we expect that positive media coverage will persuade perceivers to view a politician favorably. In contrast to SCM predictions, then, when provided evidence that a female politician is both competent and likeable, perceivers will be swayed by the media rather than endorse general societal perceptions of women politicians. Thus, we hypothesize that: Hypothesis 1: Evaluations of a Female Senator will be Unilaterally High in Warmth (1a) and Competence (1b) When Participants Read a Positive Media Message Specifically, there will be a main effect of article valence in regression Model 1 predicting higher warmth ratings (1a) and higher competence ratings (1b) when the article is positive rather than negative. We expect our hypothesis to be supported only when participants are exposed to a positive media message. Negative or costly behaviors that violate social norms are assumed by perceivers to be more diagnostic of a target’s stable personality (Jones and Davis 1965; Ybarra 2002). Thus, when media coverage is negative, judgments about the target should become more complex. In this situation, we propose that evaluations of targets are not unilaterally positive, but rather are influenced by the perceiver’s existing attitudes and beliefs, which we discuss next. The Role of Existing Attitudes and Beliefs People’s existing attitudes toward women likely predict warmth and competency judgments of negatively-depicted female politicians. Research with U.S. samples finds people generally prefer information that fits their previously held belief systems (e.g., Plaks et al. 2001). The worldview confirmation hypothesis (Major et al. 2007) predicts that raters will favorably evaluate people when they confirm existing beliefs, such as stereotypes, even if those beliefs are negative. When information about others conflicts with one’s existing beliefs, one’s worldview is threatened, and in response the target is evaluated more negatively (Major et al. 2007). Thus, even though a perceiver might hold a negative attitude towards a person (e.g., professional women are cold); he or she may like the target for confirming their existing beliefs about women. In contrast, targets who disconfirm perceivers’ preexisting beliefs are threatening, and thus perceivers may dislike these targets. Indeed, holding gender stereotypes, a type of worldview, measurably impacts individuals’ evaluations of targets, such as female politicians (Hansen and Hansen 1988; Hansen and Krygowski 1994; Pan and Kosicki 1997; Power et al. 1996). For instance, participants exposed to rock music videos portraying men and women in a stereotypical manner judged a woman in a subsequent video in a gender stereotypical manner, rating her as less dominant (Hansen and Hansen 1988). More pertinent to this study, research finds that when women violate their gender role by being agentic leaders, such as political leaders, they often are unfavorably evaluated (Bligh et al. in press; Eagly 1987; Eagly and Mladinic 1989; Eagly and Steffen 1984; Eagly et al. 2000; Fiske et al. 2002; Rudman 1998), particularly by those who endorse traditional gender roles (Eagly and Karau 2002). Furthermore, as stereotypes of feminine and masculine political issues are prescriptive, female politicians who focus on compassionate, feminine issues (e.g., poverty) are evaluated as more competent than female politicians focusing on masculine issues (e.g., defense), whereas male politicians are rated as more competent on masculine than feminine issues (Huddy and Terkildsen 1993). These studies and others (i.e., Hansen and Krygowski 1994; Power et al. 1996) demonstrate that stereotypes can influence later judgments of people and their behaviors. Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 71 Attitude Extremity and Certainty The role of gender stereotypes in evaluations is likely heightened by media messages that depict women in a negative light. Although a variety of media (e.g., newscasts, television music videos, newspapers) can activate gender stereotypes (Hansen and Hansen 1988) and attitudes by providing situational cues for forming impressions of specific political figures (Krosnick and Kinder 1990; Pan and Kosicki 1997), media messages do not affect everyone equally. Rather, negative media messages likely influence people with more or less extreme attitudes toward female politicians differently. Related research on attitude change demonstrates that whether a message (such as a newspaper article) leads to attitude change depends on the individual’s initial attitude toward the target (Anderson and Hovland 1957; Hunter et al. 1984). Specifically, messages that are highly discrepant from existing attitudes are scrutinized more (Edwards and Smith 1996), and in general result in less attitude change than messages that are only slightly discrepant from existing attitudes. The influence of negative media messages on perceptions of a female senator is thus additionally determined by how extreme or certain initial attitudes are (be they favorable or unfavorable towards women; Bem 1972; Chaiken and Baldwin 1981; Petty and Krosnick 1995). Perceivers with extreme attitudes hold their attitudes with more certainty, and thus extreme attitudes are less susceptible to attitude change and have more influence on subsequent judgments than less extreme attitudes (Petty and Krosnick 1995). For example, Chaiken and Baldwin (1981) conducted a study in which participants were primed with pro-environment or anti-environment behaviors in a questionnaire. Participants with strong initial attitudes (either pro or anti-environment) did not change their attitudes toward the environment after being primed by the questionnaire items. Thus, when confronted with a negative media message, people with extreme attitudes should rate a target in line with their initial attitude, even if a negative media message conflicts with that attitude. Based on this, we predict that: Hypothesis 2: Among Perceivers with More Extreme Attitudes Who Read a Negative Article, Those with Negative Attitudes Toward Women will Rate the Female Senator as Less Warm (2a) and Less Competent (2b) than Perceivers with Positive Attitudes Specifically, there will be a two-way interaction between hostile sexism and attitude extremity among participants reading a negative article. Because women sometimes endorse benevolent sexism more strongly than men, and men endorse hostile sexism more strongly than women (Glick and Fiske 2001; Glick et al. 2000), we predict a gender difference. The interaction in Hypothesis 2 will be stronger for women than men when benevolent sexism is the moderator variable (2c) but that the interaction will be stronger for men when hostile sexism is the moderator variable (2d). In contrast, perceivers with less extreme attitudes hold their attitudes with less certainty (Petty and Krosnick 1995), and thus a negative media message should confirm attitudes for perceivers with existing negative attitudes. For example, in Chaiken and Baldwin’s (1981) study, among participants with weak initial attitudes toward the environment, those who were primed with a pro-environment questionnaire changed their attitude to be consistent with the prime. Likewise, participants primed with the anti-environment questionnaire later reported attitudes consistent with the prime. These results suggest that individuals with less extreme attitudes might be more susceptible to media influences. Thus, we predict that: Hypothesis 3: Among Perceives with less Extreme Attitudes Who Read a Negative Article, Perceivers with Negative Attitudes will Rate the Senator as Warmer than Perceivers with Positive Attitudes (3a). Perceivers with Less Extreme Attitudes, Whether Positive or Negative, Will Rate the Senator Low in Competence (3b) Specifically, there will be a two-way interaction between hostile sexism and attitude extremity among participants reading a negative article. Because women sometimes endorse benevolent sexism more strongly than men, and men endorse hostile sexism more strongly than women (Glick and Fiske 2001; Glick et al. 2000), we predict a gender difference. Specifically, the interaction in Hypothesis 3 will be stronger for women than men when benevolent sexism is the moderator variable (3c) but that the interaction will be stronger for men when hostile sexism is the moderator variable (3d). The reason we offer different predictions for warmth (Hypothesis 3a) and competence (Hypothesis 3b) judgments is due to the worldview confirmation hypothesis (Major et al. 2007). The worldview confirmation hypothesis suggests that even though a perceiver might hold a negative attitude towards a person (e.g., professional women are cold); the perceiver may like the target for confirming their existing belief about women’s personalities. The worldview confirmation hypothesis is specific to predicting liking, or warmth ratings, but does not suggest that ratings of a stigmatized target’s competence would be positive for confirming ones’ worldview. Thus, in contrast, we predict that the media cue will provide the context for a negative evaluation of competence due to framing effects (Nelson et al. 1997). 72 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 Ambivalent Sexism The specific attitudes toward women we are interested in concern ambivalent sexism, which is comprised of two types of sexism: hostile and benevolent (Glick and Fiske 1996, 2001). Hostile sexism reflects traditional antipathy toward women, or viewing women as in competition with men. Benevolent sexism reflects men’s dependence on women for interpersonal relationships and caregiving and more positive attitudes toward women (e.g., women are more nurturing than men; Glick et al. 2000). Although superficially positive, benevolent sexism is insidious because it implies women are the weaker sex and are dependent on men for protection and intimate relationships. Research by Glick and Fiske (1996, 2001) with U.S. samples finds that men report greater endorsement of hostile sexism than women. Men also have greater endorsement of benevolent sexism than women; however the gender difference is not as large as it is for hostile sexism (Glick and Fiske 2001). Women often endorse benevolent sexism because of it its superficially positive and chivalrous nature. Indeed, endorsing benevolent sexism seems to be a coping mechanism for women in extremely patriarchal cultures (Glick and Fiske 2001; Glick et al. 2000). Thus, although men in the U.S. endorse benevolent sexism more strongly than women, women endorse benevolent sexism more strongly than hostile sexism. Overall, prior research predicts female senators should be perceived as more competent than warm, but evaluations will vary according to the (in)consistency of new information (i.e., the valence of a media message) and existing attitudes (namely, the valence and extremity of individuals’ attitudes toward women). To test the predictions of the SCM, participants completed measures of sexist attitudes toward women, read a newspaper article about a female senator that portrayed her either positively or negatively, and then rated her warmth and competence. Method Participants College students (N=340) were recruited from several private colleges and public universities in Southern California. To obtain a sample that reflects the traditional younger age of college students, 46 respondents who were aged 30 and older were omitted from the study. The remaining N=294 participants were 18 to 29 years old (M= 21.49, SD=2.62; Mdn=21), and 51% were female. Participants were primarily White (54.8%) or Latino (21.3%), with the remaining reporting Asian/Pacific Islander (8.6%), Black (4.1%), Native American (.3%), multi-racial (7.5%), or ‘other’ (3.4%) racial identities. Participants’ political affiliation was equally divided between Democrat (35.3%) and Republican (35%); 18.5% listed their party affiliation as Independent and 11.2% as ‘other.’ The majority had a somewhat liberal political ideology (M= 3.53, SD=1.21), rated on a scale of 1 (Very Conservative) to 6 (Very Liberal). Design and Procedure The design was a 2 (article valence: positive, negative) X 2 (participant gender: male, female) between-subjects factorial with two continuous moderator variables: sexist attitudes and attitude extremity. Participants completed a two-part questionnaire packet, with the first part of the packet measuring participants’ attitudes toward women. After completing the attitudes measure, participants read either a positively or negatively worded newspaper article about a female senator (Barbara Mikulski). In a pilot study with N=80 college students, participants read one of the articles (positive, n=45, or negative, n=35) and rated its valence on a scale from 1 (Extremely Negative) to 6 (Extremely Positive). The positively worded article had a significantly higher positivity rating (M=4.92, SD=.87) than the negatively worded article (M=1.77, SD=.77), t (78)=16.94, p=.001. The articles were adapted from an article appearing in The Los Angeles Times (Perry 2002) which discussed environmental issues concerning water conservation and farming, a domain found to be gender neutral in previous research (Rahn 1993; RePass 1971; Rossenwasser and Dean 1989). Aside from article valence, the referenced senator was changed from a regional politician (Diane Feinstein, California) to one from another state (Barbara Mikulski, Maryland) in order to decrease participants’ familiarity. For this same reason, participants were told the article was from The Washington Post. To increase realism, the senator’s political affiliation (Democrat or Republican) was reported, counterbalanced across participants. As a check to ensure that political party affiliation did not introduce a confound, a series of t-tests compared participants’ scores on all measured independent and dependent variables. As six variables were being tested, a Bonferroni correction was applied to control for inflated alpha. Using the corrected alpha of p<.008, scores on the independent and dependent variables did not vary by the political party affiliation of the senator (all p’s > .016). After reading the article, participants completed post-article measures of their evaluations of the senator, as well as several items to check for the effectiveness of the manipulation. Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 73 Measures Pre-article Measures Participants’ sexist attitudes were assessed with 17 items from the ambivalent sexism inventory (ASI; Glick and Fiske 1996). The ASI measures hostile and benevolent sexism by asking participants to rate the extent of agreement with several statements on 7-point Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree). Sample items include, “A good woman should be set on a pedestal by her man” (benevolent sexism) and “Women are too easily offended” (hostile sexism). The original ASI contains 22 items; however, five items pertaining to heterosexual intimacy were not included in the questionnaire as these were unrelated to our specific focus on a female senator. In accordance with Glick and Fiske (2001), the hostile (a=.82) and benevolent subscales (a=.62) of the ASI were kept separate. Likewise, a continuous measure indicative of the extremity of participants’ attitudes (regardless of their valence) was created for each sexism measure by taking the absolute value of the difference between participants’ sexism scores and the midpoint of 4 on the Likert scale. For both hostile and benevolent sexism, extremity scores ranged from 0 to 3. The mean difference from the midpoint for the hostile sexism measure was .73 (SD=.55); for the benevolent sexism measure, it was .65 (SD=.55). Post-Article Measures Post-article measures included manipulation checks for identifying the target’s job, political party, and the article valence. Participants completed one item, adapted from Bridges and Orza (1992), to assess the favorability of their overall impressions of the senator, as an additional manipulation check: “What was your overall impression of Mikulski?” scored on a 1 (Very Unfavorable) to 7 (Very Favorable) Likert-type scale. As dependent variables, respondents completed Fiske et al. (2002) warmth and competence scales. The 7-item warmth scale (a=.96; sample item: “How good natured does Mikulski seem?”) 8-item competence scale (a=.89; sample item: “How efficient does Mikulski seem?”) were measured on 7-point Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (Not at All) to 7 (Extremely). The questionnaire concluded with questions assessing political party affiliation (measured with the categories Democrat, Republican, Independent, or “other”) and political ideology (one item asking participants “How would you describe your political affiliation?” rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = Very Conservative to 6 = Very Liberal). To control for political knowledge, participants completed five political knowledge items adopted from Kathlene (1989). Participants’ answers were dichotomously coded (0 = incorrect, 1 = correct) and scores were summed to create a knowledge score ranging from 0 (none correct, not very knowledgeable) to 5 (all correct, very knowledgeable). The average knowledge score was 2.54 (SD=1.23). Results Manipulation Checks and Exploratory Analyses Prior to hypothesis testing, analyses of manipulation checks were conducted. Only participants who correctly answered the manipulation checks were included in the analyses (final N=283). Participants reading a positive article also rated their overall impression of the target as significantly more favorable than those in the negative condition, t(281)=19.51, p=.001, suggesting that the article valence manipulation was effective. Exploratory analyses were performed to determine whether control variables were associated with any of the independent and dependent variables. As six variables were being tested for each control variable, a Bonferroni correction was applied to control for inflated alpha. Using the corrected alpha of p<.008, scores on the independent and dependent variables did not vary by participants’ own political party affiliation or political knowledge (all p’s > .05). However, being more liberal was correlated with lower hostile (r(281)=-.19, p=.001) and benevolent sexism (r(281)=-.20, p=.001). Thus, liberalism was controlled for in all analyses. Racial and Ethnic Differences No racial or ethnic differences were predicted, as research using the ASI has focused on cultural, not racial, differences (Glick and Fiske 2001). However, we explored racial or ethnic differences in scores on the independent and dependent variables. The sample sizes were too small to make between-group race comparisons. Instead, a MANOVA compared scores among White participants to scores among racial minority participants as a group. All participants scored similarly on all variables except benevolent sexism, on which White participants (M=3.81; SD=.89) scored lower than racial minorities (M=4.10; SD=80), F(1, 279)=8.75, p=.003. Thus, race (coded as 0 = racial minority and 1 = White) was controlled for in all analyses with benevolent sexism. Gender Differences A MANCOVA was conducted to explore differences between males and females on all independent and 74 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 dependent variables. Race and liberalism were included as covariates. Table 1 displays descriptive statistics and Fratios for the analyses. Men scored significantly higher than women on the hostile sexism measure, which is consistent with research by Fiske and colleagues (2002). There were no other differences between men and women. Hypotheses Tests All hypotheses were tested simultaneously using a multiple linear regression analysis, with follow-up analyses of interaction effects. In the overall model, Model 1 contained the main effects of either hostile or benevolent sexism, attitude extremity, media valence (coded as 0 = negative and 1 = positive), and gender (coded as 0 = male and 1 = female), with liberalism as a control. Finally, in analyses including benevolent sexism, race (coded as 0 = racial minority and 1 = White) was controlled for in Model 1. Model 2 contained all possible two-way interactions and Model 3 contained the three-way interactions. Finally, Model 4 contained the four-way interaction term between sexism, extremity, valence, and gender. Collinearity diagnostics indicated the variables were not multicollinear; however, hostile and benevolent sexism, and attitude extremity were all centered prior to computation of interaction terms to further reduce multicolliearity (Aiken and West 1991). Hypothesis tests were conducted twice: once using the measure of hostile sexism and once using the measure of benevolent sexism. Hypothesis 1: Findings for Hostile Sexism Hypothesis 1 predicted that ratings of warmth and competence would be universally high among participants reading a positive article, regardless of their attitudes or attitude extremity. To fully support Hypothesis 1, there should be no main effects or interactions between hostile sexism or attitude extremity on ratings of warmth and competence among participants who read the positive article. To test this hypothesis, we ran our multiple linear regression analysis on only those participants who had read a positive article. Indeed, there were no significant main effects or interactions between sexism and extremity for warmth ratings, overall F(8, 130)=1.53, n.s.; R2=.09; or for competence ratings, overall F(8, 130)=1.89, n.s.; R2=.10. Further, there were no interactions by gender. Thus, when using the hostile sexism measure, Hypothesis 1 is fully supported. Hypothesis 1: Findings for Benevolent Sexism Using the same statistical approach, we tested Hypothesis 1 with benevolent sexism. There were no significant main effects or interactions between sexism and extremity for warmth ratings, overall F(9, 128)=1.18, n.s.; R2=.08; or ratings of competence, overall F(9, 128)=1.45, n.s.; R2=.09. There were no interactions with gender, suggesting that ratings of warmth and competence were unilaterally high, regardless of benevolent sexist attitudes, or the extremity of those attitudes, for both men and women. As these analyses are all non-significant, the data are not tabled. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was fully supported with both hostile and benevolent sexism. Ratings of warmth and competence were higher among those reading a positive article than among those reading a negative article; further, for those reading a positive article, ratings were universally high, regardless of participants’ gender, sexist attitudes, or attitude extremity. Hypotheses 2 and 3: Findings for Hostile Sexism Hypothesis 2 predicted that, when reading a negative article about a female senator, perceivers with extreme, negative attitudes toward women would rate the female senator as less warm (2a) and less competent (2b) than perceivers with extreme, positive attitudes. Further, Hypothesis 3 predicted that, among perceivers with less extreme attitudes who read a negative article about a female senator, those with negative attitudes toward women should rate the female senator as warmer (more likeable) than those with positive attitudes toward women (3a). Perceivers with Measure Mean (SD) Test Statistic Women (n=144) Men (n=139) Hostile sexisma 3.52 (.86) 4.19 (.83) F(1, 317)=41.16*** Extremity of hostile sexism scoresb .79 (.58) .67 (.52) F(1, 317)=2.18 Benevolent sexisma 3.94 (.88) 3.92 (.80) F(1, 317)=.01 Extremity of benevolent sexism scoresb .68 (.56) .59 (.53) F(1, 317)=2.00 Likeabilitya 4.22 (1.52) 4.04 (1.42) F(1, 317)=1.30 Competencea 5.12 (.94) 4.68 (1.01) F(1, 317)=12.86*** Table 1 Gender differences on independent and dependent variables ***p<.001 a Rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale, higher numbers indicate greater magnitude of the construct. b Range of 0 to 3. Higher numbers indicate more extreme attitudes. Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 75 less extreme attitudes, whether positive or negative, will rely on the context as a cue and rate the senator as low in competence (3b) when reading a negative article. Additionally, interactions with gender were explored; we predicted that the findings would be stronger for men than for women (2d and 3d). Model 4 in our overall multiple linear regression analysis shows the four-way interaction between hostile sexism, extremity, valence, and gender was significant for ratings of warmth, ?F(1, 263)=3.64, p=.057; ?R2=.01, and competence, ?F(1, 263)=6.68, p=.01; ?R2=.017, which lends some support for our hypotheses; see Table 2. Hypotheses 2 and 3 were tested in a follow-up multiple regression analysis tested on those participants who read a negative article. Model 1 contained the main effects of hostile sexism, attitude extremity, and gender, and liberalism as a control. Model 2 contained all possible two-way interactions and Model 3 contained the three-way interaction between sexism x extremity x gender. Separate multiple regression analyses predicted warmth and competence as dependent variables. Hypotheses 2 and 3 would be supported by a significant two-way interaction in Model 2 between hostile sexism and attitude extremity among participants reading the negative article. Specifically, we predicted that participants with extreme attitudes would rate the senator as less warm (Hypothesis 2a) and less competent (Hypothesis 2b) if they had more sexist attitudes. In contrast, participants with less extreme and more sexist attitudes would rate the senator as more warm (Hypothesis 3a), but equally low in competence as those with less extreme but positive attitudes toward women (Hypothesis 3b). Interactions with gender were also explored. The results of the regression analyses are presented in Table 3. Looking first at warmth ratings, there was a significant sexism x extremity interaction in Model 2 among those reading the negative article (ß=-.38, p=.011) (see Fig. 1). There was no significant interaction between hostile sexism, attitude extremity, and gender, tested in Model 3, ?F(1, 132)=3.16, n.s.; ?R2=.022, lending no support for Hypothesis 2d. Table 2 Interactions with hostile sexism on warmth and competence, all participants Warmth Competence ß t (df=263) ß t (df=263) Model 1 : Main Effects Model Hostile Sexism -.009 -.191 -.086 -1.47 Attitude Extremity .003 .080 -.031 -.569 Media Valence (0 = negative; 1 = positive) .741 18.05*** .436 8.27*** Gender (0 = male; 1 = female) .048 1.11 .186 3.33*** Liberalism -.001 -.018 .063 1.19 Overall Block Statistics F(5, 274)=67.55, p<.001; R2=.552 F(5, 274)=19.43, p<.001; R2=.262 Model 2: Two-Way Interactions Model Sexism × Extremity -.175 -2.55* -.253 -2.87** Sexism × Gender -.085 -1.19 -.008 -.091 Sexism × Valence -.009 -.142 -.05 -.637 Extremity × Gender -.130 -1.76* -.206 -2.17* Extremity × Valence .004 .067 .094 1.25 Gender × Valence .098 1.29 -.069 -.707 Overall Block Statistics ?F(6, 268)=1.89, p=.082; ?R2=.018 ?F(6, 268)=2.04, p=.061; ?R2=.032 Model 3: Three-Way Interactions Model Sexism × Extremity × Valence .079 .990 .081 .698 Sexism × Extremity × Gender .194 2.12* .042 1.03 Extremity × Gender × Valence .175 1.745+ .283 1.94+ Gender × Valence × Sexism .115 1.16 .004 .321 Overall Block Statistics ?F(4, 264)=2.41, p=.05; ?R2=.015 ?F(4, 264)=1.71, p=.149; ?R2=.018 Model 4: Four-Way Interaction Model Sexism × Extremity × Valence × Gender -.159 -1.21 -.542 -2.59** Overall Block Statistics ?F(1, 263)=3.64, p=.057; ?R2=.01 ?F(1, 263)=6.68, p=.01; ?R2=.017 + p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 76 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 Looking next at competency ratings, we found a significant hostile sexism x attitude extremity x gender interaction among those reading a negative article, tested in Model 3, ?F (1, 132)=4.32, p=.040; ?R2=.026 (see Table 3). Among women, there was no significant hostile sexism x attitude extremity interaction, ?F(1, 66)=.97, n.s.; ?R2=.00 (see Fig. 2, Panel A). However, this interaction was significant among men, ?F(1, 65)=11.39, p=.001; ?R2=.14. Hypothesis 2b predicted that among participants with extreme attitudes reading a negative article, those with more extreme sexist attitudes would rate the senator as less competent than those with extreme non-sexist attitudes. Hypothesis 2d suggested that this finding would be stronger for men, when hostile sexism is used as the measure of sexism. As shown in Fig. 2 (Panel B), Hypotheses 2b was supported among men; this also supports Hypothesis 2d. Among those with more extreme attitudes, competency ratings were lower when males had high hostile sexism (ß=-.37, p=.033). However, there was no support for Hypothesis 3b, which predicted that participants with less extreme attitudes, whether positive or negative, will rely on the situation as a cue and rate the senator as low in competence when reading a negative article. Rather, we found a positive relationship between sexist attitudes and competency ratings for males with less extreme attitudes (ß=.28, p=.10). This finding supports the worldview confirmation hypothesis in that participants with less certain (i.e., less extreme) attitudes respond positively when their attitude (or worldview) is confirmed. Thus, Hypothesis 2a and 3a were supported among men: when reading a negative article about a female senator who had extreme attitudes toward women, the senator was rated as warmer if the participants had less hostile sexism. And, among men with less extreme attitudes reading a negative article about a female senator, the senator was rated warmer if participants had more hostile sexism. As the findings held among men, but not women, this also supports hypotheses 2d and 3d. However, support is mixed for Hypotheses 2b and 3b. Hypothesis 2b was supported for men, but not women: when reading a negative article, men with extreme attitudes rated the senator as more competent if they were lower in hostile sexism. Hypothesis 3b was also not supported among women; further, the findings for men Fig. 1 Warmth ratings as a function of hostile sexism and attitude extremity Table 3 Interactions with hostile sexism on warmth and competence, negative article Warmth Competence ß t (df=132) ß t (df=132) Model 1 : Main Effects Model Hostile Sexism -.036 -.383 -.094 -1.04 Attitude Extremity .015 .168 -.073 -.863 Gender (0 = male; 1 = female) -.029 -.318 .206 2.33* Liberalism -.002 -.02 .082 .99 Overall Block Statistics F(4, 136)=.06, p=.993; R2=.002 F(4, 136)=2.89, p=.025; R2=.078 Model 2: Two-Way Interactions Model Sexism × Extremity -.38 -2.58* -.381 -2.74** Sexism × Gender -.187 -1.29 -.055 -.402 Extremity × Gender -.321 -2.30* -.39 -2.97** Overall Block Statistics ?F(3, 133)=3.46, p=.018; ?R2=.072 ?F(3, 133)=5.30, p=.002; ?R2=.098 Model 3: Three-Way Interactions Model Sexism x Extremity x Gender .35 1.78+ .384 2.08* Overall Block Statistics ?F(1, 132)=3.16, p=.078; ?R2=.022 ?F(1, 132)=4.32, p=.04; ?R2=.026 + p<.10; *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 77 did not support Hypothesis 3b, but rather supported the worldview confirmation hypothesis: when reading a negative article about a female senator, men with less extreme attitudes toward women rated her as more competent if they were high in hostile sexism. Hypotheses 2 & 3: Findings for Benevolent Sexism Model 4 in our overall analysis found no significant interaction between benevolent sexism, attitude extremity, valence, or gender on either warmth, ?F(1, 260)=1.39, n.s.; ?R2=.002, or competency ratings, ?F(1, 260)=1.39, n.s.; ?R2=.004. Likewise, Model 2 found no significant interactions between benevolent sexism and attitude extremity on either warmth (ß=.01, n.s.) or competency ratings (ß=.09, n.s.). There were also no interactions with gender. Thus, Hypotheses 2 and 3 were not supported for benevolent sexism. As the analyses were non-significant, this information was not tabled. Discussion Not only are impressions of others formed automatically, but they are often formed with very limited available information. Female political leaders work in gender incongruent careers and are susceptible to significant media attention; thus, they present an important context in which to study impression formation. The SCM (Fiske et al. 2002) has provided a useful framework for classifying the evaluations of stereotyped individuals. However, the utility of the model in predicting individuals’ evaluations of a specific target has yet to be fully explored (although, see Cuddy et al. 2004, 2005; Masser, et al. 2007 for initial work in this area). Further, this existing research suggests that examination of potential moderators of the SCM as a predictor of individual perceptions is warranted (e.g., Masser et al. 2007). Despite evidence in the general attitude literature that suggests both priming (e.g., Krosnick and Kinder 1990; Pan and Kosicki 1997) and the strength and valence of people’s existing attitudes (e.g., Eagly and Karau 2002) moderate evaluations of others, little research has simultaneously explored both the role of media cues and existing attitudes on evaluations of warmth and competence. This study sought to address these gaps in the literature by integrating several areas of research to augment predictions from the SCM (Fiske et al. 1999, 2002; Glick and Fiske 1999, 2001) regarding how people evaluate a specific target’s warmth and competence within a particular context. The findings provided some support for all hypotheses but Hypothesis 3b and Hypotheses 2 and 3 tested with benevolent sexism. When presented with a positive media cue, perceivers have unilaterally positive perceptions of a female senator’s warmth and competence, regardless of the valence and extremity of their hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes. This is perhaps our most robust finding, as it was found both when examining hostile sexist and benevolent sexist attitudes, and with both men and women in our sample; importantly, this finding is in contrast to the SCM prediction that female politicians are generally rated as competent but cold. Rather, our study provides evidence that positive media coverage can lead to high ratings of competence and warmth among men and women, regardless of their levels of sexism. This finding supports the literature on media effects and shows that media can have a powerful influence on evaluations of female politicians. This finding further supports the need to test the SCM in the context of individuating information of a specific target. Fig. 2 Panel a. Hostile sexism and attitude extremity did not interact to predict competency ratings among women. Panel b Competency ratings as a function of hostile sexism and attitude extremity among men 78 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 In line with our theorizing, the findings also suggest that a negative media cue does not necessarily lead to negative evaluations of female senators. Rather, the effect of a negative media cue is dependent on both perceivers’ gender, their existing attitudes toward women, type of sexist attitudes, and the extremity of their attitudes toward women. Individuals with extreme sexist attitudes hold fast to their feelings (Petty and Krosnick 1995), as evidenced by the finding that men with extreme attitudes, when presented with a negative media cue, rated the senator as less warm and less competent if their existing attitudes toward women were negative rather than positive. However, there are stipulations on the universality of this finding: this pattern was only true for men with extreme hostile sexism, and did not hold for women. Thus, gender and type of attitude, in the form of hostile or benevolent sexism, matters in evaluations of warmth and competence. In contrast to extreme attitudes, participants with less extreme negative attitudes received confirmation of their preliminary attitudes from the senator’s negative portrayal in the article. Consistent with the worldview confirmation hypothesis (Major et al. 2007), male participants with less extreme hostile sexism who read a negative article rated the female senator higher in warmth and competence. This ironic effect is explained by the worldview confirmation hypothesis, which states that perceivers are pleased when a stigmatized target confirms their beliefs about the world, e.g., that female senators are ineffective, resulting in liking the stigmatized target for conforming to the “status quo.” Hypothesis 3b predicted that participants with less extreme sexist attitudes would rate the senator lower in competence; however, the results instead indicate that the worldview confirmation hypothesis extends to competence ratings as well. It is important to note that this finding did not hold for women. Thus we find once again that the worldview confirmation hypothesis did not hold universally: sexist attitudes mattered. The differing findings for hostile and benevolent sexism among male and female participants are also important and justify analyzing them separately. It is interesting to note that hostile sexism predicted evaluations of a female senator whereas benevolent sexism did not. In the context of females in political power, hostile sexism seems much more relevant than the supposedly more benign benevolent sexism that promotes “cherishing” and protecting women. Research with a different subgroup of women, such as stayat- home mothers, might find benevolent sexism plays a larger role in predictions from the SCM. Further, given that men more strongly endorse hostile sexism than women, it is not surprising that our results for Hypotheses 2 and held only for male participants. In sum, the results suggest that there is more complexity to impressions of high-status career women than the general framework of the SCM proposed. When perceivers are asked to make warmth and competence judgments about a specific target person, their evaluations appear to depend on not only the evaluative dimensions of the SCM (status and competition), but also on their existing attitude, the extremity of their attitude, the type of attitude (benevolent or hostile), and the positive or negative context in which the judgments are made. These findings have notable implications for future work with the SCM. First, the studies demonstrate that, with some success, the model can predict individual evaluations of social groups who are perceived as both high in competition and high in status (such as women in powerful careers). However, like prior work (e.g., Masser et al. 2007), the findings also suggest that there are important limitations to these predictions, and that, when applying the SCM to judgments of specific targets, individuals’ existing attitudes and judgment context should be taken into consideration. Thus although the SCM shows that in general people predict “most Americans” view women professionals as competent, but cold (Fiske et al. 2002), there is hope, as these judgments are not unilateral. When perceivers report their own judgments, rather than predicting what “most Americans” think, their evaluation of a specific female professional’s warmth and competence is a complex one that relies on existing attitudes and context. Although female politicians cannot directly change their constituents’ attitudes toward women, exerting control over the situations in which they are evaluated (e.g., type of media venue and topics for debate) might work to maximize the favorability of constituents’ perceptions. Limitations and Future Research There are some limitations to the current research. The ambivalent sexism inventory, used to assess sexist attitudes in this study, is an explicit measure of sexism, and thus it is possible that participants with negative attitudes intentionally gave socially desirable responses. Future research should include implicit as well as explicit measures of sexism in order to fully and accurately capture a wide range of participants' sexist attitudes. Future work should also extend our findings to see how attitude strength, a concept related to but distinct from attitude extremity or certainty (e.g., Abelson 1995; Fazio 1995), further relates to perceptions of female senators and female leaders in general. Research should also include additional measures of attitude strength, such as explicit measures of attitude importance, embeddedness, or centrality (Abelson 1995; Fazio 1995). Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 79 Practical Implications Given the ubiquitous nature of social judgments, outlining the linkages between basic social psychological processes and political judgments has important implications for women politicians, career women outside of the political realm, and the media’s coverage of women currently in—and vying for—leadership positions. Female senators work in gender-incongruent careers, and receive significant media attention. In our study, some participants held sexist attitudes toward women, ranging from less to more extreme, and these negative perceptions of women interacted with the valence of newsprint media commentary to elicit differential evaluations of the senator. Our results show that individuals’ evaluations of a woman in a male-dominated career can be influenced by media commentary, particularly that which is negative. Our findings also support a growing literature regarding the impact of the media on perceptions of political and organizational leaders. Specifically, our findings lend support to the notion of the “agenda-setting” function of the press (Domke et al. 1999; McCombs and Shaw 1972; McCombs and Reynolds 2002), and suggest that future research should explore both how the valence (positive and negative) and amount of coverage that women political leaders receive potentially interact with followers’ existing attitudes to impact perceptions. Our findings suggest that “smear campaigns” and negative political ads may be particularly deleterious for female candidates in both the political realm and the organizational boardroom. Although we focused here solely on print communications, future research also should explore the impact of richer media, such as negative radio and television ads, on the perceptions of male versus female candidates to explore the implications of various types of media coverage as well. Overall, as media cues significantly impact perceptions of female senators, positive media coverage may help alleviate bias, influencing those with less extreme or moderately extreme hostile sexist attitudes, whereas negative coverage may strengthen bias among those with sexist attitudes. The present study thus has real-world applications for stereotyped groups, particularly for women in genderincongruent, high status careers. By focusing on the role of sexist attitudes in evaluations, this research addresses the modern society manifestation of sexism. Most importantly, findings from the present study can improve the public’s perceptions of stigmatized groups via newsprint media commentary by not focusing on the negative aspects of a target, and, instead, presenting a target in a more neutral fashion. References Abele, A. E., Cuddy, A. J. C., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2008). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: A view from different perspectives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1063–1065. doi:10.1002/ejsp.574. Abelson, R. P. (1995). Attitude extremity. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 25–41). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. Anderson, N. H., & Hovland, C. I. (1957). The representation of order effects in communication research (Appendix A). In C. I. Hovland (Ed.), The order of presentation in persuasion (pp. 158–169). New Haven: Yale University Press. Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1–62). New York: Academic. Bligh, M. C., Schlehofer, M. M., Casad, B. J., & Gaffney, A. M. (in press). Competent enough, but would you vote for her? Gender stereotypes and media influences on perceptions of women politicians. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Bridges, J. S., & Orza, A. M. (1992). The effects of employment role and motive for employment on the perceptions of mothers. Sex Roles, 27, 331–343. doi:10.1007/BF00289943. Casper, C., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2010). Automatic stereotype activation is context dependent. Social Psychology, 41, 131–136. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000019. Chaiken, S., & Baldwin, M. W. (1981). Affective-cognitive consistency and the effect of salient behavioral information on the selfperception of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1–12. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.1.1. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn't cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 701–718. doi:10.1111/j.0022- 4537.2004.00381.x. Cuddy, A. J. C., Norton, M. I., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). This old stereotype: The pervasiveness and persistence of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 267–285. doi:10.1.1.130.2092. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Competence and warmth as universal trait dimensions of interpersonal and intergroup perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 40, pp. 61–149). New York: Academic. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V., Glick, P., Demoulin, S., Leyens, J. P., et al. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 1–33. doi:10.1348/ 014466608X314935. Devine, P. G., & Elliot, A. J. (1995). Are racial stereotypes really fading? The Princeton trilogy revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1139–1150. Domke, D., Shah, D. V., & Wackman, D. B. (1998). Media priming effects: Accessibility, association, and activation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10, 51–74. Domke, D., McCoy, K., & Torres, M. (1999). News media, racial perceptions, and political cognition. Communications Research, 26, 570–607. doi:10.1177/009365099026005003. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573. 80 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 543–558. doi:10.1177/0146167289154008. Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754. doi:10.1037/ 0022-3514.46.4.735. 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: Erlbaum. Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47, 99– 114. doi:10.1023/A:1021020920715. Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 202–216. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.5. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58. doi:10.1111/ j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x. Fazio, R. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247–283). Mahwah: Erlbaum. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603. Ferguson, M. J., & Zayas, V. (2009). Automatic evaluation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 362–366. doi:10.1111/ j.1467-8721.2009.01668.x. Fiske, S. T., & Cuddy, A. J. C. (2006). Stereotype content across cultures as a function of group status. In S. Guimond (Ed.), Social comparison processes and levels of analysis (pp. 249– 263). New York: Cambridge University Press. Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis) respecting versus (dis)liking: Status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–489. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00128. 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 & Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. TRENDS in Cognitive Science, 11, 77–83. doi:10.1016/j. tics.2006.11.005. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135. doi:10.1111/j.1471- 6402.1997.tb00104.x. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Sexism and other “isms”: Independence, 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: American Psychological Association. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: Differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice. In J. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 278–306). New York: Cambridge University Press. 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. Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). How rock music videos can change what is seen when boy meets girl: Priming stereotypic appraisal of social interaction. Sex Roles, 19, 287–316. doi:10.1007/BF00289839. Hansen, C. H., & Krygowski, W. (1994). Arousal-augmented priming effects: Rock music videos and sex object schemas. Communication Research, 21, 24–47. doi:10.1177/009365094021001003. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley. Hester, J. B., & Gibson, R. (2003). The economy and second-level agenda setting: A time series analysis of economic news and public opinion about the economy. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80, 73–90. Hetherington, M. J. (1996). The media’s role in forming voters’ national economic evaluations in 1992. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 372–395. Holbrook, R. A., & Hill, T. G. (2005). Agenda-setting and priming in prime time television: Crime dramas as political cues. Political Communication, 22, 277–295. doi:10.1080/10584600591006519. Huddy, L., & Terkildsen, N. (1993). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 119–147. Hunter, J. E., Danes, J. E., & Cohen, S. H. (1984). Mathematical models of attitude change: Change in single attitudes and cognitive structure. San Diego: Academic. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Iyengar, S., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Krosnick, J. A. (1984). The evening news and presidential evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 778–787. doi:10.1037/ 0022-3514.46.4.778. Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 2, pp. 219–266). New York: Academic. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60107-0. Kathlene, L. (1989). Uncovering the political impacts of gender: An exploratory study. Western Political Quarterly, 42, 397–421. Kiousis, S. (2003). Job approval and favorability: The impact of media attention to the Monica Lewinsky scandal on public opinion of President Bill Clinton. Mass Communication & Society, 6, 435–451. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0604_6. Kristof, N. D. (2008, February 10). When women rule. The New York Times. [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes. com/2008/02/10/opinion/10kristof.html. Krosnick, J. A., & Brannon, L. A. (1993). The impact of the gulf war on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Multidimensional effects of political involvement. American Political Science Review, 87, 963–975. Krosnick, J. A., & Kinder, D. R. (1990). Altering the foundations of support for the President through priming. American Political Science Review, 84, 497–512. Major, B., Kaiser, C. R., O’Brien, L. T., & McCoy, S. K. (2007). Perceived discrimination as worldview threat or worldview confirmation: Implications for self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1068–1086. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514.92.6.1068. Malhotra, N., & Krosnick, J. A. (2007). Retrospective and prospective performance assessments during the 2004 election campaign: Tests of mediation and news media priming. Political Behavior, 29, 249–278. doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9027-8. Masser, B., Grass, K., & Nesic, M. (2007). ‘We like you, but we don’t want you’- The impact of pregnancy in the workplace. Sex Roles, 57, 703–712. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9305-2. McCombs, M., & Reynolds, A. (2002). News influence on our pictures of the world. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 81 effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 1–18). Mahwah: Erlbaum. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of the mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176–187. Miller, J. M., & Krosnick, J. A. (2000). News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 295–309. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M., & Clawson, R. A. (1997). Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19, 221–246. doi:10.1023/A:1024834831093. Noveck, J. (2008, January 10). Dilemma for Clinton: Can she be warm and likable, tough and competent all at once? Associated Press. Retrieved from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Clinton’s+ task%3A+Being+likable+AND+tough-a01611435405. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1997). Priming and media impact on the evaluations of the President’s performance. Communication Research, 24, 3–30. doi:10.1177/009365097024001001. Perry, T. (2002, June 17). Farmers oppose call to idle land agriculture: Tempers flare in Imperial Valley as a U.S. deadline nears to cut use of Colorado River water. ‘Fallowing is a four-letter word,’ a grower says. Los Angeles Times, p. B-1. Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (Eds.). (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah: Erlbaum. Plaks, J. E., Stoessner, S. J., Dweck, C. S., & Sherman, J. W. (2001). Person theories and attention allocation: Preferences for stereotypic versus counterstereotypic information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 876–893. doi:10.1037//0022- 3514.80.6.876. Power, J. G., Murphy, S. T., & Coover, G. (1996). Priming prejudice: How stereotypes and counter-stereotypes influence attribution of responsibility and credibility among ingroups and outgroups. Human Communication Research, 23, 36–58. doi:10.1111/ j.1468-2958.1996.tb00386.x. Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about political candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 472–496. RePass, D. E. (1971). Issue salience and party choice. The American Political Science Review, 65, 389–400. Rogers, E. M., & Dearing, J. W. (1988). Agenda-setting research: Where has it been, where is it going? In J. A. Anderson (Ed.), Communication yearbook 11 (pp. 555–594). Beverly Hills: Sage. Rossenwasser, S. M., & Dean, N. G. (1989). Gender role and political office. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 77–85. doi:10.1111/ j.1471-6402.1989.tb00986.x. Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629– 645. Stoker, L. (1993). Judging presidential character: The demise of Gary Hart. Political Behavior, 15, 193–223. doi:10.1007/ BF00993853. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., & White, I. K. (2002). Cues that matter: How political ads prime racial attitudes during campaigns. American Political Science Review, 96, 75–90. doi:10.1017/S0003055402004240. van Rijswijk, W., & Ellemers, N. (2002). Context effects on the application of stereotype content on multiple categorizable targets. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 90– 101. doi:10.1177/0146167202281008. Ybarra, O. (2002). Naïve causal understanding of valenced behaviors and its implications for social information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 421–441. 82 Sex Roles (2011) 65:69–82 Copyright of Sex Roles is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Source 1: Academic Journal Article (provided as a file) Source 2: Web sitehttp://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-womens-blog-with-jane-martinson/2013/oct/01/project-guardian-public-transport-safer-women Source 3: Newspaper EBSCO Publishing Citation Format: MLA (Modern Language Assoc.): ________________________________________ NOTE: Review the instructions at http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=en&feature_id=MLA and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines. Works Cited Samborn, Hope Viner. "Media Bias Against Women Stuck In A Bygone Era."Perspectives: A Magazine For & About Women Lawyers 19.3 (2011): 4-7.Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Nov. 2015. <!--Additional Information: Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://ezproxy.dom.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=59781475&site=ehost-live&scope=site Media Bias Against Women Stuck in a Bygone Era "AMG's Mad Men isn't the only broad cast program today in which men demean women on the air or in the media. Consider a WHKO-AM Boston radio program in which producer Bill Cooksey stated the following about a Republican candidate for state treasurer, "I think she's hot. She's tiny. She's short. She's got a banging little body on her. Facial-wise, I give her about a seven. Body-wise, I give her an eight-and-a-half. Tight little butt. I endorse KarynPolito." His cohost, Tom Finneran, former speaker of the Massachusetts state house, chimed in by repeating "tight little butt." Despite calls for an apology from Polito's political opponent, WRKOAM management refused. Stereotypes Persist Although images of powerful women lawyers, doctors, candidates for public office, and presidents of companies appear in all types of media, the number of these portraits is still relatively small. Most often, media outlets color images of powerful women with the same stereotypes and double standards that have haunted women in the public arena for decades. Media personalities focus on women's gender, appearance, outfits, hairstyles, sexuality, and whether or not they are mothers. "Things haven't changed in 102 years," says Professor Carolyn Kitch of Temple University in Philadelphia. "Certain images have a cultural resonance, and we see them over and over." Women need not be running for office to be subjected to these stereotypes. During U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan's confirmation hearings, some critics focused on her status as a single, older career woman. "If women are competent, single, and 50, we have no use for them," says Linda Lowen, a media observer and journalist with about.com. The media speculated that Kagan was a lesbian "because they can't understand that a woman could say that a career could hold a top priority," Lowen adds. Another Supreme Court justice, Sonia Sotomayor, found herself subjected to media gender bias when conservative radio host G. Gordon Liddy said about her, "Let's hope that the key conferences aren't when [Sotomayor]'s menstruating or something, or just before she's going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then." Some media observers say it is a fear of powerful women that is the driving force behind these images. According to Lowen, this fear leads to "slut shaming" -- a media method of calling a woman's sexuality into question and using innuendo to color a view of a woman's sexual morals. As women become more powerful and achieve more in the workplace, they expect to have greater gender equity. But instead, "there appears to be a subconscious backlash against it by the media, and slut shaming is one of those things," she says. One recent example of this tactic occurred when the website Gawker.com displayed photographs of Krystal Ball, a 2010 Democratic candidate for Virginia's 1st District congressional seat. The pictures, taken during her college years at a party, show a dildo strapped on her ex-husband's face and Ball in racy situations. Ball, a certified public accountant and business owner, blogged about the photos on the Huffington Post. "The tactic of making female politicians into whores is nothing new," she wrote in October 2010."It's part of this whole idea that female sexuality and serious work are incompatible. I had to come out publicly and raise my voice on this issue, even though I risked becoming some joke candidate named Krystal Ball," she continued."I also risked drawing more attention to the photos, which I still find tremendously embarrassing." Lowen says Ball received terrific national coverage. "She got a positive response from anyone who interviewed her. It was a very important shift in this election cycle. "We have always felt that women were endangering themselves if they pointed out the bias," Lowen adds. "The opposite is true if she steps up and takes an active role calling it out." Men, however, are treated differently. When nude Cosmopolitan magazine photos -- published in 1982 during his law school days -- surfaced of Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown prior to his election to the U.S. Senate, the media was almost mute, Lowen says. "A woman with a political career would have been slammed in a way that he wasn't," she notes. "Men are not called sluts." Fear of Powerful Women Even when women such as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi achieve high positions, "they are both portrayed as powerful -- almost shrews -- who can be manipulative to get their way," says Lisa M. Parcell, assistant professor at the Elliott School of Communication of Wichita State University in Kansas. "The media and society like to see strong women such as Rosie the Riveter, but not powerful women like Eleanor Roosevelt, who had power over her husband." Parcell adds that "men are supposed to be strong and powerful, and we are comfortable with that. Having strong women is okay, but powerful women still make us uncomfortable." Some of the stereotypic treatment is subtle. Forbes presented the "Worlds 100 Most Powerful Women" list, which considers a woman's "buzz factor."The buzz factor is "a bizarre way of looking at a woman's power," Lowen says. "It is convenient shorthand for how the media ranks them -- who is talking about them and who they are seen with." In this way, First Lady Michelle Obama ranked first and Clinton barely outranked singer/ performance artist Lady Gaga. In contrast, another Forbes list that looks at the "World's Most Powerful People" is composed almost entirely of men and does not consider any "buzz factor." This buzz factor perpetuates the view that women are "arm candy rather than powerful people," Lowen observes. Women candidates often are treated as if they are fighting animals. In Florida, a local race depicted two women candidates in a "cat fight," says BernellE.Tripp, associate professor at the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications in Gainesville. "We still have a tendency to attach stereotypes to women. Society has something to do with it." A September 2010 Newsweek cover story called "The Bear Truth: Will the 'Mama Grizzlies' Really Protect America's Kids?" featured pictures of women candidates portrayed as grizzly bears -- with the tag line "mama grizzlies," a term Sarah Palin has used to refer to herself and women candidates she endorsed in the 2010 midterm elections. "These women were depicted throughout that article as bears," Kitch says. This is a traditional trend story that says "powerful women" are a "surprising new trend," she adds. "Women's success in anything -- in politics, in sports, and in business -- has been discussed as a surprising 'new' trend since the 1960s." Another recurring trend story examines moms who leave work to care for children. Kitch says that Google and Fox News have reported in recent months that "young women are now choosing to stay home with their kids. It is a story that comes up repeatedly as if it was new." She adds that this kind of feature first appeared in Parenting magazine in the 1920s. "It tells me that women's parity in the workplace has not changed," she says. "That is kind of mind blowing because most moms work. Most don't have a choice." Women News Source Shortage Many experts say one reason for this type of portrayal of women is that men are the media power brokers. Men hold 97 percent of the clout positions in mainstream media, according to the New York -- based Women's Media Center (WMC), www.womensmediacenter.com.And this situation does not appear to be changing quickly. "Between 1990 and 2005 only 20 percent of new media jobs were held by women," the center reports. Yet 65 percent of all mass communication students are women, the WMC states. Sunday morning political talk shows such as NBC's Meet the Press, ABC's This Week, and CBS's Face the Nation rarely feature women commentators. Only one in four guests is a woman, according to statistics provided by the WMC. "We are invited to the table, but not the best table," Lowen says. And fewer women are quoted as news sources when compared with men, especially for serious issues such as terrorism, observes Tamara K. Baldwin, chair and professor of the Department of Mass Media at Southeast Missouri State University in Cape Girardeau. The WMC tried to address the shortage of women news sources by creating SheSource.org, an online site that provides female experts for journalists to interview. Although the evening news appears to be a bright spot with two women -- CBS's Katie Couric and ABC's Diane Sawyer -- sitting in the anchor chairs, experts say it is misleading. "It is ironic that women have reached a position of importance in the television news industry at a time when the ratings of the evening news are going down and viewership is going down," says Maurine H. Beasley, professor emerita of the Philip Merrill College of Journalism at the University of Maryland in College Park. "Now that [television news] is falling on hard times, it is okay to let women in," Lowen observes. "It's not a moneymaking venture for the networks. It is a dinosaur." Downplaying Women's Achievements In April 2010, the space shuttle Discovery set a record for the most women in space, but little was written about this or other strides made by women in science and technology, experts say. "The media just didn't feel that it was important. Science, technology, engineering, and math are not sexy," she says, observing that leading media outlets often overlook the achievements of women even when they win Nobel prizes. "We have to commodify women, and ranking them in terms of intelligence is not in the media's interest," Lowen adds. In sports, women receive limited media coverage, especially on the professional level. However, Kitch says female Olympians are being covered, a change in the past 25 years. "News media images of women in sports are a good example of how positive portrayals of female athletes -- or the fact that they get any coverage -- parallels changes in the population," Kitch points out. "Because more and more young girls participate in sports since Title IX made it perfectly normal, people don't know there was a time when that wasn't the case. It is now a normal part of a young woman's socialization to play sports." On the entertainment front, Kitch observes that the plots of books, television shows, and movies often feature four women: the smart, quirky woman; the sexy, dangerous woman; the self-sacrificing woman; and the sweet, perky girl next door. This treatment can be seen from the original Little Women story to the more recent Designing Women, Sex and the City, and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. In contrast, the typical male plotline features a single man succeeding in making his way in the world, Kitch says. "The four women who are friends somehow embody the feminist geist of their age," Kitch points out. Currently, some story concepts are changing to portray women as the primary breadwinner, such as the TV show Parenthood, which features a woman lawyer and her stay-at-home husband. Other television programs such as The Real Housewives of New Jersey, The Real Housewives of Atlanta, Desperate Housewives, and Dancing with the Stars "don't show women as professionals and using their minds," Beasley says. "They emphasize women as sexual beings. When women become too assertive, society operates to put women back in their place," she adds. After World War II, a media campaign was launched to prompt women to return home after working in war plants. Today, a campaign of conservative voices favors men in charge and suggests that women should be back in the home, Beasley observes."It is almost as though there is a social undercurrent to prop up men by making women still subservient as sexual objects or domestic individuals." Some images of powerful, successful, and strong women can be found in movies, "but they have not done particularly well at the box office, "Tripp notes."You do have the smaller or independent films that [portray] different, multifaceted women. These films show the completion of one woman," she adds. Appearance Is Still Everything The media, especially movies and television, continues to focus heavily on a woman's appearance. "If you look at television, you are going to think that everyone is beautiful," Tripp says. "If you watch the CW network, you would think everyone was 20 years old with three boyfriends," she adds. "It's an impulse of our society to sexualize women to bring more eyeballs to the tables," Lowen says. Some advertisers still exhibit this gender bias in their advertisements, experts observe, while others are opting to portray women of different shapes and sizes. "You see a lot more variety. You see a lot more ethnic representation of women in ads, "Tripp says, but "we still have a ways to go." A recent large department store ad showed a young girl folding towels near a toy washer and dryer. "We are already training them in the same traditional gender roles that have been around forever," Baldwin says. Other ads objectify women."That is not getting any better. It is getting worse," she laments. "So much of what is out there is still very biased in the roles [assigned] and the ways we portray women. It has a profound effect on women growing up in the world." Beasley criticizes toy ads that use images of little girls who "look like prostitutes" and feature gender-specific toys such as nail polish, dress-up items for girls, and separate toys for boys. She says these ads sexualize the girls and promote the image of boys as "big and strong." However, some advertisers recently launched "real women campaigns" featuring older, heavier, tall, or short women -- a diverse group promoting products such as Dove soap. "If you want to attract consumers, you need to target that market, "Tripp explains, adding that viewers need to be able to imagine themselves using a particular product. Reflecting on the past 30 years, Parcell says advertising today portrays women in more powerful positions outside the home. "You are more likely to see ads in which the women are breadwinners as well as their husbands. In some ads the woman is the breadwinner, and the man stays at home," she notes. "One way you can attract consumers and get them to pay attention to your ad is to have [an individual] in the ad who is similar to the viewer so the consumer sees someone who is like her or the person she would like to be." Women with high-paying jobs who are prominent household buyers are a key market segment. One home improvement store ran a recent ad that, rather than showing a damsel in distress, featured women performing home improvement tasks themselves. "You can't make money if you tick off your target audience," Parcell says. Television, movies, and ads also play to young women in their 20s because "young women are a hugely important marketing demographic," according to Kitch. "They haven't chosen their brands yet. They are depicted more positively or realistically." But this is temporary, she adds, "because the expectation is that [young women] will leave the workforce." Voices in the New Media The world of blogging is an up-and-coming area for women's voices -- and for uncontrolled stereotyping. "New types of media have given a voice to people who didn't have the power and who didn't own a press," Kitch says. The number of women blogging is growing quickly. BlogHer, a media site that provides access to women's blogs, hosts an annual convention for women bloggers. These conventions are filled with vendors trying to get their products connected with "mommy blogs" and others. However, some websites, such as Gawker, continue to demean women in the Mad Men 1960s style -- with extreme disrespect and offense. To many observers, this begs the question: "Has the media really come a long way in 50 years, or is the portrayal of women stuck in the Mad Men's bygone era?" Hope Viner Samborn is a lawyer and a Chicago-area freelance writer. Leading media outlets often overlook the achievements of women even when they win Nobel prizes. ~~~~~~~~ By Hope Viner Samborn Source 4: Book You can choose one of these books: 1.(Before The Revolution) or 2. (The Culture of Beauty)