Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2015-01
Validity evidence of the Portuguese adaptation of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory / Evidencias de validez de la adaptación portuguesa de la Escala de Sexismo Ambivalente
Modern forms of sexism have promoted the development of new scales and evaluation tools. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) (Glick & Fiske, 1996) aims to assess sexism along two dimensions: hostile sexism and benevolent sexism. The aim of this study is to present evidence of the validity of the factor structure of the Portuguese version of the ASI by analysing its structure and its relationships with neosexism and social dominance. The sample consisted of 446 Portuguese participants (68.6% female) between 17 and 77 years old. Results confirmed the two-factor structure; however, the best fit was registered with a four-factor structure: one hostile factor and three benevolent factors. Both hostile and benevolent sexism were correlated with neosexism and social dominance orientation. Future research should explore the dimensionality of the scale based on a four-dimension structure and its relationship to others sexism issues.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2.
BeckerJ. C.WrightS. C. (2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 62–77. doi:10.1037/a0022615
3.
BrislinR. W. (1986). The working and translation of research instruments. In LonnerW. J.BerryJ. W. (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137–164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
BurtM. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217
5.
ByrneB. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6.
CuadradoI. (2009). El estudio psicosocial del prejuicio. In GaviriaE.CuadradoI.LópezM. (Eds.), Introducción a la Psicología Social (pp. 387–424). Madrid: Sáenz y Torres.
7.
DaviesM.GilstonJ.RogersP. (2012). Examining the relationship between male rape myth acceptance, female rape myth acceptance, victim blame, homophobia, gender roles, and ambivalent sexism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 2807–2823. doi:10.1177/0886260512438281
8.
EckesT.Six-MaternaI. (1999). Hostilität und Benevolenz: Eine Skala zur Erfassung des ambivalenten Sexismus. Zeitschrift Für Sozialpsychologie, 30, 211–228. doi:10.1024//0044-3514.30.4.211
9.
ExpósitoF.MoyaM. C.GlickP. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente: medición y correlatos. Revista de Psicología Social, 13, 159–169. doi:10.1174/021347498760350641
10.
FeatherN. T.McKeeI. R. (2012). Values, right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and ambivalent attitudes toward women values, right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and ambivalent attitudes toward women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 2479–2504. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00950.x
11.
FernándezI.PoeschlG.GlickP.PáezD.MoyaM. (2001). Sexismo, masculinidad-feminidad y factores culturales. Reme, 4, 8–9.
12.
FormigaN. S.FachiniA. C.CuradoF. C.TeixeiraJ. (2005). As duas faces do preconceito feminino: Análise do inventário de sexismo ambivalente em homens brasileiros. Psicologia: Argumento, 41, 57–63.
13.
FormigaN. S.GolveiaV. V.SantosM. N. D. (2002). Inventário de sexismo ambivalente: sua adaptação e relação com o gênero. Psicologia em Estudo, 7, 103–111. doi:10.1590/S1413-73722002000100013
14.
FowersA. F.FowersB. J. (2010). Social dominance and sexual self-schema as moderators of sexist reactions to female subtypes. Sex Roles, 62, 468–480. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9607-7
15.
GigerJ. C.Orgambídez-RamosA.GonçalvesG.SantosJ.GomesA. (2012). Dominância social e sexismo ambivalente: Evidências métricas da escala SDO. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, in press.
16.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
17.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2001). Ambivalent sexism. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 115–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80005-8
18.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 530–535. doi:10.1177/0361684311414832
19.
GlickP.FiskeS. T.MladinicA.SaizJ. L.AbramsD.MasserB.LópezW. L. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763
20.
GonçalvesG.SantosJ.GomesA.VieiraF.VasconcelosP. (2008). Novas formas de sexismo em Portugal: Diferenças de género. In Proceedings from 7° Congresso Nacional de Psicologia da Saúde. Presented at the 7° Congresso Nacional de Psicologia da Saúde, Porto (Portugal).
21.
GuerraV. M.GouveiaV. V.PessoaV. S.RiveraG. A.De Souza FilhoM. L. (2004). Inventário de ambivalência em relacão aos homens: adaptacão brasileira e relacão com o gênero. Psicologia: Teoria e Prática, 6, 47–61.
22.
INE. (2012). Estadística de Profesionales Colegiados - Año 2011. June 1 Madrid: Notas de Prensa.
23.
KimH. J. (1998). Men’s motivation toward women and sexual harassment. The Korean Journal of Psychology, 3, 133–147.
24.
LameirasM.RodríguezY. (2003). Evaluación del sexismo ambivalente en estudiantes gallegos. Acción Psicológica, 2, 131–136.
25.
MagalhãesE.OliveiraG. K.LeitãoF.ChavesS.CapelaS.NogueiraC.MartinsC. (2007). Adaptação do inventário de sexismo ambivalente para uma população de estudiantes universitários portugueses. Psicologia: Teoria, Investigação e Prática, 1, 41–54.
26.
MarôcoJ. (2010). Análise de equações estruturais. Fundamentos teóricos, sfotware e aplicações. Lisboa: ReporNumber, Lda.
27.
MladinicA.SaizJ. L.DíazO.OyarceP. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente en estudiantes universitarios: Teoría, medición y diferencias de género. Revista de Psicología Social y Personalidade, 14, 1–14.
MoyaM.ExpósitoF. (2008). Sexismo: Los efectos perniciosos de una ideología ambivalente. In MoralesJ. F.HuiciC.GómezA.GaviriaE. (Eds.), Método, Teoría e Investigación en Psicología Social (pp. 538–557). Madrid: Pearson.
30.
MoyaM.ExpósitoF.PadillaJ. L. (2006). Revisión de las propiedades psicométricas de las versiones larga y reducida de la Escala sobre Ideología de Género. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6, 709–727.
31.
MuñizJ.HambletonR. K. (2000). Adaptación de los test de unas culturas a otras. Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento, 2, 129–149.
32.
NicolA. A. M.RoundingK. (2013). Alienation and empathy as mediators of the relation between social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism and expressions of racism and sexism. Personality and Individual Differences. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2013.03.009
33.
PasqualiL. (2003). Psicometria: Teoria dos testes na psicologia e na educação. Petrópolis: Vozes.
34.
PrattoF.LiuJ. H.LevinS.SidaniusJ.ShihM.BachrachH.HegartyP. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369–409. doi:10.1177/0022022100031003005
35.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
36.
PryorJ. B.GieddJ. L.WilliamsK. B. (1995). A social psychological model for predicting sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 69–84. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01309.x
37.
RecioP.CuadradoM. I.RamosE. (2007). Propiedades psicométricas de la Escala de Detección de Sexismo en Adolecentes (DSA). Psicothema, 19, 522–528.
38.
RodríguezY.LameirasM.CarreraM. V.FraíldeJ. M. (2009). Aproximación conceptual al sexismo ambivalente: Estado de la cuestión. Summa Psicológica UST, 6, 131–142.
39.
Rodríguez-CastroY.Lameiras-FernándezM.Carrera-FernándezM.-V.Vallejo-MedinaP. (2013). La fiabilidad y validez de la escala de mitos hacia el amor: las creencias de los y las adolescentes. Revista de Psicología Social, 28, 157–168. doi:10.1174/021347413806196708
40.
RolleroC. (2013). Hombres y mujeres frente a la cosificación: Los efectos de los modelos mediáticos sobre el bienestar, la autoestima y el sexismo ambivalente. Revista de Psicología Social, 28, 373–382. doi:10.1174/021347413807719166
41.
RottenbacherJ. (2010). Sexismo ambivalente, paternalismo masculino e ideología política en una muestra de adultos jóvenes de la ciudad de Lima. Pensamiento Psicológico, 7, 9–18.
42.
SibleyC. G.OverallN. C.DuckittJ. (2007). When women become more hostilely sexist toward their gender: The system-justifying effect of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 57, 743–754. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9306-1
43.
Silván-FerreroM. D. P.BustillosA. (2007). Adaptación de la escala de orientación a la dominancia social al castellano: validación de la dominancia grupal y la oposición a la igualdad como factores subyacentes. Revista de Psicología Social, 22, 3–15. doi:10.1174/021347407779697485
44.
SpenceJ. T.HelmreichR. (1972). The Attitude toward Women Scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of woman in contemporary society. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 66–67.
45.
SpenceJ. T.HelmreichR.StappJ. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes toward Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 219–220. doi:10.3758/BF03329252
46.
SwimJ. K.AikinK. J.HallW. S.HunterB. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199
47.
SwimJ. K.HyersL. L.CohenL. L.FergusonM. J. (2001). Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 31–53. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00200
48.
TougasF.BrownR.BeatonA. M.JolyS. (1995). Neosexism: Plus Ca Change, Plus C’est Pareil. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 842–849. doi:10.1177/0146167295218007
49.
Valor-SeguraI.ExpósitoF.MoyaM. (2008). Atribucion del comportamiento del agresor y consejo a la victima en un caso de violencia domestica Attribution of aggressor’s behavior and advice to the victim in a case of domestic violence. Revista de Psicología Social, 23, 171–180. doi:10.1174/021347408784135896
50.
WatkinsD. (1989). The role of confirmatory factor analysis in cross-cultltral research. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 685–701. doi:10.1080/00207598908247839
