This research investigates the phenomenon of “friendly” sexist teases (FSTs), which we define as playful intergroup teases that are based on the negative gender stereotypes that devalue one’s gender group. We first employed a diary study to explore the prevalence of FSTs in college students’ everyday life and found that this type of teasing tends to occur in social situations and often between close others. In a second study, we experimentally manipulated perceived closeness with the teaser. We predicted that individuals teased by someone with whom they shared a perceived closeness would interpret FSTs as playful fun; therefore, the tease would not have a negative psychological effect. We further predicted that those teased by someone less close would likely focus on the literal content of the sexist tease, resulting in negative consequences to gender self-esteem. Results supported these predictions and provided insight into the phenomenon of FSTs.
AbramsJ. R.BippusA. (2011).
An intergroup investigation of disparaging humor. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
30(2), 193–201. doi:10.1177/0261927X10397162
2.
AbramsJ. R.BippusA. M. (2014).
Gendering jokes: Intergroup bias in reactions to same- versus opposite-gender humor. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
33(6), 692–702. doi:10.1177/0261927X14544963
3.
AlbertsJ. K. (1992).
An inferential/strategic explanation for the social organization of teases. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,
11, 153–177. doi:10.1177/0261927X92113003
4.
AndersonV. N. (2018).
Cisgender men and trans prejudice: Relationships with sexual orientation and gender self-esteem. Psychology of Men & Masculinity,
19(3), 373–384. doi:10.1037/men0000125
5.
AronA.AronE. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction.
New York, NY:
Hemisphere.
6.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollanD. (1992).
Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
63, 596–612. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596
7.
AronA.AronE. N.TudorM.NelsonG. (1991).
Close relationships as including the other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
60, 241–253.
8.
AronA.MelinatE.AronE. N.ValloneR.BatorR. (1997).
The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: A procedure and some preliminary findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
23, 363–377. doi:10.1177/0146167297234003
9.
BasfordT. E.OffermannL. R.BehrendT. S. (2014).
Do you see what I see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
38(3), 340–349. doi:10.1177/0361684313511420
10.
BaxterL. A. (1984).
An investigation of compliance-gaining as politeness. Human Communication Research,
10, 427–456. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00026.x
11.
BaxterL. A. (1992).
Forms and functions of intimate play in personal relationships. Human Communication Research,
18, 336–363. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00556.x
12.
BeckS.ClabaughS. E.ClarkR. A.KosovskiM. C.DaarR.HefnerV.SuriR. (2007).
Teasing among college men and women. Communication Studies,
58, 157–172. doi:10.1080/10510970701341105
13.
BellR. A.Buerkel-RothfussN. L.GoreK. E. (1987). “
Did you bring the yarmulke for the cabbage patch kid?” The idiomatic communication of young lovers. Human Communication Research,
14, 47–67. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1987.tb00121.x
14.
BellR. A.HealyJ. G. (1992).
Idiomatic communication and interpersonal solidarity in friends’ relational cultures. Human Communication Research,
18, 307–335. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00555.x.
15.
BlakemoreJ. E. O. (2003).
Children’s beliefs about violating gender norms: Boys shouldn’t look like girls, and girls shouldn't act like boys. Sex Roles,
48, 411–419. doi:10.1023/A:1023574427720
16.
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN. (1998). Coping with group-based discrimination: Individualistic versus group-level strategies. In SwimJ. K.StangorC. (Eds), Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 244–266).
San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
17.
CapodilupoC. M.NadalK. L.CormanL.HamitS.LyonsO. B.WeinbergA. (2010). The manifestation of gender microaggressions. In SueD. W. (Ed.), Microaggressions and marginality: Manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 193–216).
Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons Inc.
18.
ChenB.AndersonV. N. (2017).
Chinese college students’ gender self-esteem and trans prejudice. International Journal of Transgenderism,
18(1), 66–78. doi:10.1080/15532739.2016.1256803
CohenG. L.GarciaJ. (2005). “
I am us”: Negative stereotypes as collective threats. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
89, 566–582. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.566
21.
CowanG.HodgeC. (1996).
Judgments of hate speech: The effects of target group, publicness, and behavioral responses of the target. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
26, 355–374.
22.
CrandallC. S.EshlemanA.O’BrienL. (2002).
Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
8, 359–378.
23.
CrockerJ.LuhtanenR.BlaineB.BroadnaxS. (1994).
Collective self-esteem and psychological well-being among White, Black, and Asian college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
20, 503–513. doi:10.1177/0146167294205007
24.
CzoppA. M. (2008).
When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
44, 413–420. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.007
25.
CzoppA. M.MonteithM. J. (2003).
Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
29, 532–544. doi:10.1177/0146167202250923.
26.
DahlJ.VescioT.WeaverK. S. (2015).
How threats to masculinity sequentially cause public discomfort, anger, and ideological dominance over women. Social Psychology,
46(4), 242–254. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000248
27.
DavisH. A.GabelmanM. M.WingfieldR. D. (2011). “
She let us be smart:” Low-income African-American first-grade students’ understandings of teacher closeness and influence. The Journal of Classroom Interaction,
46, 4–6.
28.
DeBlaereC.MoradiB. (2008).
Structures of the schedules of racist and sexist events: Confirmatory factor analyses of African American women’s responses. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
32, 83–94.
29.
DerksD.BosA. E. R.von GrumbkowJ. (2008).
Emoticons and online message interpretation. Social Science Computer Review,
26, 379–388.
30.
DeVellisR. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
31.
DionisiA. M.BarlingJ. (2018).
It hurts me too: Examining the relationship between male gender harassment and observers’ well-being, attitudes, and behaviors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
23(3), 303–319. doi:10.1037/ocp0000124.
32.
DoddE. H.GiulianoT. A.BoutellJ. M.MoranB. E. (2001).
Respected or rejected: Perceptions of women who confront sexist remarks. Sex Roles,
45, 567–577.
33.
DoosjeB.EllemersN. (1997). Stereotyping under threat: The role of group identification. In SpearsR.OakesP. J.EllemersN.HaslamS. A. (Eds), The social psychology of stereotyping and group life (pp. 257–272).
Cambridge, MA:
Blackwell.
34.
DouglassS.MirpuriS.EnglishD.YipT. (2016). “
They were just making jokes”: Ethnic/racial teasing and discrimination among adolescents. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology,
22, 69–82. doi:10.1037/cdp0000041.
FiskeS. T.StevensL. E. (1993). What’s so special about sex? Gender stereotyping and discrimination. In OskampS.CostanzoM. (Eds), Gender issues in contemporary society: Applied social psychology annual (pp. 173–196).
Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
37.
FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF.HulinC. L.GelfandM. J.MagleyV. J. (1997).
Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology,
82, 578–589.
38.
FordT. E. (2000).
Effects of sexist humor on tolerance of sexist events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
26, 1094–1107. doi:10.1177/01461672002611006
39.
FordT. E.BoxerC. F.ArmstrongJ.EdelJ. R. (2008).
More than “just a joke”: The prejudice-releasing function of sexist humor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
34(2), 159–170. doi:10.1177/0146167207310022.
40.
FordT. E.FergusonM. A. (2004).
Social consequences of disparagement humor: A prejudiced norm theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
8, 79–94. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0801_4.
41.
FordT. E.WoodzickaJ. A.TriplettS. R.KochersbergerA. O. (2013).
Sexist humor and beliefs that justify societal sexism. Current Research in Social Psychology,
21, 64–81.
42.
GarciaA. L.MillerD. A.SmithE. R.MackieD. M. (2006).
Thanks for the compliment? Emotional reactions to group-level versus individual-level compliments and insults. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,
9(3), 307–324. doi:10.1177/1368430206064636
43.
GormanG.JordanC. H. (2015). “
I know you’re kidding”: Relationship closeness enhances positive perceptions of teasing. Personal Relationships,
22, 173–187. doi:10.1111/pere.12071
44.
GrahamE. E. (1995).
The involvement of humor in the development of social relationships. Communication Reports,
8(2), 158–169. doi:10.1080/08934219509367622
45.
GrayJ. A.FordT. E. (2013).
The role of social context in the interpretation of sexist humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research,
26(2), 277–293.
46.
GreenwoodD.IsbellL. M. (2002).
Ambivalent sexism and the dumb blonde: Men’s and women’s reactions to sexist jokes. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
26, 341–350. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00073
47.
GreggD. H.SomersC. L.Pernice-DucaF.Van DaleK. G. (2016).
Teasing experiences and risk-taking: Gender and self-esteem as moderator and mediator. Journal of School Violence,
15(3), 365–385. doi:10.1080/15388220.2015.1054935
48.
HaslamS. A.OakesP. J.TurnerJ. C.McGartyC. (1995).
Social categorization and group homogeneity: Changes in the perceived applicability of stereotype content as a function of comparative context and trait favourableness. British Journal of Social Psychology,
34(2), 139–160. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01054.x
49.
HodsonG.EssesV. M. (2002).
Distancing oneself from negative attributes and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
38, 500–507.
50.
HolmesJ. (1989).
Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence. Applied Linguistics,
10(2), 194–213. doi:10.1093/applin/10.2.194
51.
HooverA. E.HackT.GarciaA. L.GoodfriendW.HabashiM. M. (2019).
Powerless men and agentic women: Gender bias in hiring decisions. Sex Roles,
80, 667–680. doi:10.1007/s11199-018-0964-y
52.
HyersL. L. (2007).
Resisting prejudice every day: Exploring women’s assertive responses to anti-Black racism, anti-Semitism, heterosexism, and sexism. Sex Roles,
56, 1–12. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9142-8
53.
JohnsonA. M. (1990).
The “only joking” defense: Attribution bias or impression management?Psychological Reports,
67, 1051–1056.
54.
JostJ. T.KayA. C. (2005).
Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
88, 495–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498
55.
KaiserC. R.MillerC. T. (2003).
Derogating the victim: The interpersonal consequences of blaming events on discrimination. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations,
6, 227–237.
56.
KeltnerD.CappsL.KringA. M.YoungR. C.HeereyE. A. (2001).
Just teasing: A conceptual analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin,
127, 229–248. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.127.2.229
57.
KeltnerD.YoungR. C.HeereyE. A.OemigC.MonarchN. D. (1998).
Teasing in hierarchical and intimate relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
75, 1231–1247.
58.
KowalskiR. M. (2000). ‘
I was only kidding!’: Victims’ and perpetrators’ perceptions of teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
26, 231–241.
59.
KowalskiR. M. (2004).
Proneness to, perceptions of, and responses to teasing: The influence of both intrapersonal and interpersonal factors. European Journal of Personality,
18, 331–349. doi:10.1002/per.522
60.
KrugerJ.GordonC. L.KubanJ. (2006).
Intentions in teasing: When “just kidding” just isn’t good enough. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
90, 412–425. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.412.
61.
LaFranceM.WoodzickaJ. A. (1998). No laughing matter: Women’s verbal and nonverbal reactions to sexist humor. In SwimJ.StagnorC.(Eds), Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 61–80).
San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
62.
LampertM. D. (1996). Studying gender differences in the conversational humor of adults and children. In SlobinD. I.GerhardtJ.KyratzisA.GuoJ.(Eds), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp (pp. 579–596).
Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
63.
LeaperC. (2000). The social construction and socialization of gender. In MillerP. H.ScholnickE. K.(Eds), Towards a feminist developmental psychology (pp. 127–152).
New York, NY:
Routledge Press.
64.
LevyG. D.TaylorM. G.GelmanS. A. (1995).
Traditional and evaluative aspects of flexibility in gender roles, social convention, moral rules, and physical laws. Child Development,
66, 515–531. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00887.x.
65.
LewandowskiG. W.Jr.NardoneN.RainesA. J. (2010).
The role of self-concept clarity in relationship quality. Self and Identity,
9(4), 416–433. doi:10.1080/15298860903332191
66.
LewisJ. A.MendenhallR.HarwoodS. A.Browne HunttM. (2016).
“Ain’t I a woman?”: Perceived gendered racial microaggressions experienced by Black women. The Counseling Psychologist,
44(5), 758–780. doi:10.1177/0011000016641193
67.
LoS. (2008).
The nonverbal communication functions of emoticons in computer-mediated communication. CyberPsychology & Behavior,
11, 595–597.
68.
LopezV. (2019).
No Latina girls allowed: Gender-based teasing within school sports and physical activity contexts. Youth & Society,
51(3), 377–393. doi:10.1177/0044118X18767772
69.
LuhtanenR.BlaineB.CrockerJ. (1991, April). Personal and collective self-esteem and depression in African-Americans and White students. Poster session presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York City, NY.
70.
LuhtanenR.CrockerJ. (1992).
A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
18, 302–318.
71.
LuorT. T.WuL.LuH.-P.TaoY.-H. (2010).
The effect of emoticons in simplex and complex task-oriented communication: An empirical study of instant messaging. Computers in Human Behavior,
26(5), 889–895.
72.
MaccobyE. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together.
Cambridge, MA:
Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
73.
MallenM.DayS.GreenM. (2003).
Online versus face-to-face conversations: An examination of relational and discourse variables. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training,
40, 155–163. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.40.1-2.155
74.
MallettR. K.FordT. E.WoodzickaJ. A. (2016).
What did he mean by that? Humor decreases attributions of sexism and confrontation of sexist jokes. Sex Roles,
75, 272–284. doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0605-2
75.
MattesonA. V.MoradiB. (2005).
Examining the structure of the schedule of sexist events: Replication and extension. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
29, 47–57.
76.
MillerR. S. (1997). We always hurt the ones we love: Aversive interactions in close relationships. In KowalskiR. M. (Ed.), Aversive interpersonal behaviors (pp. 13–25).
New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
77.
MoradiB.SubichL. M. (2003).
A concomitant examination of the relations of perceived racist and sexist events to psychological distress for African American women. The Counseling Psychologist,
31(4), 451–469. doi:10.1177/0011000003031004007
78.
MorryM. M. (2005).
Allocentrism and cross-sex friendship satisfaction: The mediating roles of self-disclosure and closeness. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Sciences,
37, 211–222. doi:10.1037/h0087258
79.
Moss-RacusinC. A.DovidioJ. F.BrescollV. L.GrahamM. J.HandelsmanJ. (2012).
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS),
109, 16474–16479. doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109
80.
O’BrienK. R.McAbeeS. T.HeblM. R.RodgersJ. R. (2016).
The impact of interpersonal discrimination and stress on health and performance for early career STEM academicians. Frontiers in Psychology,
7, 615. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00615.
81.
OverallN. C.HammondM. D.McNultyJ. K.FinkelE. J. (2016).
When power shapes interpersonal behavior: Low relationship power predicts men’s aggressive responses to low situational power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
111(2), 195–217. doi:10.1037/pspi0000059
82.
PawlukC. J. (1989).
Social construction of teasing. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior,
19, 145–167.
83.
PerryB. L.HarpK. L. H.OserC. B. (2013).
Racial and gender discrimination in the stress process: Implications for African American women’s health and well-being. Sociological Perspectives,
56(1), 25–48. doi:10.1525/sop.2012.56.1.25.
84.
ProninE.SteeleC. M.RossL. (2004).
Identity bifurcation in response to stereotype threat: Women and mathematics. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
40(2), 152–168. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00088-X
85.
QuattroneG. A.JonesE. E. (1980).
The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
38(1), 141–152. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.141
86.
RodinM. J.PriceJ. M.BrysonJ. B.SanchezF. J. (1990).
Asymmetry in prejudice attribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
26, 481–504.
87.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
88.
RudmanL. A.GoodwinS. A. (2004).
Gender differences in automatic in-group bias: Why do women like women more than men like men?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
87(4), 494–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.494.
89.
ShapiroJ. P.BaumeisterR. F.KesslerJ. W. (1991).
A three-component model of children’s teasing: Aggression, humor, and ambiguity. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
10, 459–472.
90.
SheltonJ. N.StewartR. E. (2004).
Confronting perpetrators of prejudice: The inhibitory effects of social costs. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
28, 215–223.
91.
SmithP. K.ThompsonD. (1991). Practical approaches to bullying.
London, England:
Fulton.
92.
SteeleC. M.AronsonJ. (1995).
Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
69(5), 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797.
93.
SteeleC. M.SpencerS. J.AronsonJ. (2002).
Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
34, 379–440. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0
94.
SueD. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation.
Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons Inc.
95.
SueD. W.CapodilupoC. M.TorinoG. C.BucceriJ. M.HolderA. M. B.NadalK. L.EsquilinM. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice.American Psychologist,
62(4), 271–286. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271
96.
SwimJ. K.CohenL. L.HyersL. L. (1998). Experiencing everyday prejudice and discrimination. In SwimJ. K.StangorC.(Eds), Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 37–60).
San Diego, CA:
Academic.
97.
SwimJ. K.HyersL. L. (1998).
Excuse me – What did you just say?!: Women’s public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
35, 68–88. doi:10.10006/jesp.1998.1370
98.
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
99.
SzymanskiD. M.StewartD. N. (2010).
Racism and sexism as correlates of African American women’s psychological distress. Sex Roles,
63(3), 226–238. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9788-0
100.
TajfelH. (1982).
Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology,
33, 1–39. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245
101.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–48).
Monterey, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
102.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. (Eds), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24).
Chicago, IL:
Nelson-Hall.
103.
VezzaliL.DruryJ.VersariA.CadamuroA. (2016).
Sharing distress increases helping and contact intentions via social identification and inclusion of the other in the self: Children’s prosocial behaviour after an earthquake. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,
19(3), 314–327. doi:10.1177/1368430215590492
104.
WesslerS. L.De AndradeL. L. (2006).
Slurs, stereotypes, and student interventions: Examining the dynamics, impact, and prevention of harassment in middle and high school. Journal of Social Issues,
62, 511–532. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2006.00471.x
105.
WoodzickaJ. A.FordT. E. (2010).
A framework for thinking about the (not-so-funny) effects of sexist humor. Europe’s Journal of Psychology,
6(3), 174–195. doi:10.5964/ejop.v6i3.217
106.
WoodzickaJ. A.MallettR. K.HendricksS.PruittA. V. (2015).
It’s just a (sexist) joke: Comparing reactions to sexist versus racist communications. HUMOR: International Journal of Humor Research,
28, 289–309. doi:10.1515/humor-2015-0025
