Men’s Hostile Sexism and Biased Perceptions of Partners’ Support: Underestimating Dependability Rather Than Overestimating Challenges to Dominance

Abstract

Hostile sexism expresses derogation of women’s competence and emphasizes that women will exploit men’s relational dependence. Men who endorse hostile sexism perceive their female partners more negatively, but do these negative perceptions stem from motives for dominance or insecurities about dependence? We tested both perspectives by assessing bias in perceptions of partners’ behaviors that challenge dominance (criticism, instruction, taking over) versus affirm partners are dependable (love, care, availability). Both members of 100 heterosexual couples reported how much they received and enacted these behaviors in (a) a lab-based discussion and (b) six monthly retrospective reports about an ongoing important goal. In both support contexts, men’s hostile sexism was associated with underestimating dependability-relevant support, particularly when partners reported providing low support. This pattern did not emerge for dominance-relevant behaviors. These results indicate that men’s hostile sexism involves insecurities about dependence, producing perceptions that female partners are less dependable than they actually are.

Keywords

sexist attitudes prejudice gender interpersonal processes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman

R. A.

Ledermann

Kenny

D. A.

(2016). Power analysis for the ActorPartner Interdependence Model [Unpublished manuscript]. https://robert-ackerman.shinyapps.io/APIMPowerR/

Armenti

N. A.

Babcock

J. C.

(2016). Conjoint treatment for intimate partner violence: A systematic review and implications. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 5, 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000060

Bareket

Shnabel

(2020). Domination and objectification: Men’s motivation for dominance over women affects their tendency to sexually objectify women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 44, 28–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684319871913

Baumeister

R. F.

Smart

Boden

J. M.

(1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.5

Chen

Fiske

S. T.

Lee

T. L.

(2009). Ambivalent sexism and power-related gender-role ideology in marriage. Sex Roles, 60, 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9585-9

Christopher

A. N.

Mull

M. S.

(2006). Conservative ideology and ambivalent sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 223–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00284.x

Connor

R. A.

Fiske

S. T.

(2018). Not minding the gap: How hostile sexism encourages choice explanations for the gender income gap. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318815468

Cross

E. J.

Overall

N. C.

(2019). Women experience more serious relationship problems when male partners endorse hostile sexism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 1022–1041. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2560

Cross

E. J.

Overall

N. C.

Hammond

M. D.

Fletcher

G. J.

(2017). When does men’s hostile sexism predict relationship aggression? The moderating role of partner commitment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616672000

10.

Cross

E. J.

Overall

N. C.

Low

R. S.

McNulty

J. K.

(2018). An interdependence account of sexism and power: Men’s hostile sexism, biased perceptions of low power, and relationship aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117, 338–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000167

11.

Cutrona

C. E.

Russell

(1987). The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. In Jones

W. H.

Perlman

(Eds.), Advances in personal relationships (Vol. 1, pp. 37–67). JAI Press.

12.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01

13.

Downey

Feldman

S. I.

(1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1327–1343. https://doi.org/10.13072/midss.655

14.

Feeney

B. C.

Collins

N. L.

(2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 113–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314544222

15.

Fisher

M. I.

Hammond

M. D.

(2018). Personal ties and prejudice: A meta-analysis of romantic attachment and ambivalent sexism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 1084–1098. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218804551

16.

Fitzsimons

G. M.

Finkel

E. J.

Vandellen

M. R.

(2015). Transactive goal dynamics. Psychological Review, 122, 648–673. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039654

17.

Fletcher

G. J.

Kerr

P. S.

(2010). Through the eyes of love: Reality and illusion in intimate relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019792

18.

Girme

Y. U.

Overall

N. C.

Simpson

J. A.

Fletcher

G. J.

(2015). “All or nothing”: Attachment avoidance and the curvilinear effects of partner support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 450–475. https://doi.org/10.1037/a003886

19.

Glick

Diebold

Bailey-Werner

Zhu

(1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672972312009

20.

Glick

Fiske

S. T.

(1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.70.3.491

21.

Glick

Fiske

S. T.

(2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109

22.

Hack

(2017). Hostile sexism. In Nadal

(Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of psychology and gender (pp. 895–896). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384269.n298

23.

Hammond

M. D.

Cross

E. J.

Overall

N. C.

(2020). Relationship (in)security is central to the sources and outcomes of sexism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, e12522. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12522

24.

Hammond

M. D.

Milojev

Huang

Sibley

C. G.

(2018). Benevolent sexism and hostile sexism across the ages. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 863–874. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617727588

25.

Hammond

M. D.

Overall

N. C.

(2013). Men’s hostile sexism and biased perceptions of intimate partners: Fostering dissatisfaction and negative behavior in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1585–1599. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616721499026

26.

Hammond

M. D.

Overall

N. C.

(2015). Benevolent sexism and support of romantic partner’s goals: Undermining women’s competence while fulfilling men’s intimacy needs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1180–1194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215593492

27.

Hammond

M. D.

Overall

N. C.

(2017). Dynamics within intimate relationships and the causes, consequences, and functions of sexist attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416686213

28.

Holt-Lunstad

(2018). Why social relationships are important for physical health: A systems approach to understanding and modifying risk and protection. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevpsych-122216-011902

29.

Jayamaha

S. D.

Overall

N. C.

(2019). The dyadic nature of self-evaluations: Self-esteem and efficacy shape and are shaped by support processes in relationships. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10, 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617750734

30.

Kelley

H. H.

Thibaut

J. W.

(1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. Wiley.

31.

Kenny

D. A.

Kashy

D. A.

Cook

W. L.

(2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press.

32.

Knee

C. R.

Hadden

B. W.

Porter

Rodriguez

L. M.

(2013). Self-determination theory and romantic relationship processes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313498000

33.

Lemay

E. P.

Jr. Clark

M. S.

Feeney

B. C.

(2007). Projection of responsiveness to needs and the construction of satisfying communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 834–853. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.834

34.

Magee

J. C.

Galinsky

A. D.

(2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520802211628

35.

Maner

J. K.

(2017). Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 526–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417714323

36.

Masser

B. M.

Abrams

(2004). Reinforcing the glass ceiling: The consequences of hostile sexism for female managerial candidates. Sex Roles, 51, 609–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-5470-8

37.

Murray

S. L.

(2005). Regulating the risks of closeness: A relationship-specific sense of felt security. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 74–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00338.x

38.

Nadler

Chernyak-Hai

(2014). Helping them stay where they are: Status effects on dependency/autonomy-oriented helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034152

39.

Nezlek

J. B.

(2011). Multilevel modeling for social and personality psychology. SAGE.

40.

Overall

N. C.

Fletcher

G. J.

Simpson

J. A.

Fillo

(2015). Attachment insecurity, biased perceptions of romantic partners’ negative emotions, and hostile relationship behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 730–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038987

41.

Overall

N. C.

Fletcher

G. J. O.

Kenny

D. A.

(2012). When bias and insecurity promote accuracy: Mean-level bias and tracking accuracy in couples’ conflict discussions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 642–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211432764

42.

Overall

N. C.

Fletcher

G. J. O.

Simpson

J. A.

(2010). Helping each other grow: Romantic partner support, self-improvement and relationship quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1496–1513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210383045

43.

Overall

N. C.

Hammond

M. D.

(2013). Biased and accurate: Depressive symptoms and daily perceptions within intimate relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 636–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213480188

44.

Overall

N. C.

Hammond

M. D.

McNulty

J. K.

Finkel

E. 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, 195–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000059

45.

Overall

N. C.

Sibley

C. G.

Tan

(2011). The costs and benefits of sexism: Resistance to influence during relationship conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022727

46.

Pietromonaco

P. R.

Collins

N. L.

(2017). Interpersonal mechanisms linking close relationships to health. American Psychologist, 72, 531–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000129

47.

Reis

H. T.

(2014). Responsiveness: Affective interdependence in close relationships. In Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(Eds.), Mechanisms of social connection: From brain to group (pp. 255–271). American Psychological Association.

48.

Rosenthal

Rosnow

R. L.

(2007). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

49.

Rusbult

C. E.

Martz

J. M.

Agnew

C. R.

(1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x

50.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. The American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68

51.

Sheppard

L. D.

Johnson

S. K.

(2019). The femme fatale effect: Attractiveness is a liability for businesswomen’s perceived truthfulness, trust, and deservingness of termination. Sex Roles, 81, 779–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01031-1

52.

Sibley

C. G.

Becker

J. C.

(2012). On the nature of sexist ambivalence: Profiling ambivalent and univalent sexists. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 589–601. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1870

53.

Sibley

C. G.

Wilson

M. S.

(2004). Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes toward positive and negative sexual female subtypes. Sex Roles, 51, 687–696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-0718-x

54.

Sibley

C. G.

Wilson

M. S.

Duckitt

(2007). Antecedents of men’s hostile and benevolent sexism: The dual roles of social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206294745

55.

Simpson

J. A.

Rholes

W. S.

Phillips

(1996). Conflict in close relationships: An attachment perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 899–914. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.5.899

56.

Tipler

C. N.

Ruscher

J. B.

(2019). Dehumanizing representations of women: The shaping of hostile sexist attitudes through animalistic metaphors. Journal of Gender Studies, 28, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2017.1411790

57.

West

T. V.

Kenny

D. A.

(2011). The truth and bias model of judgment. Psychological Review, 118, 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022936

58.

Whitaker

M. P.

(2013). Centrality of control-seeking in men’s intimate partner violence perpetration. Prevention Science, 14, 513–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0332-z

59.

Yakushko

(2005). Ambivalent sexism and relationship patterns among women and men in Ukraine. Sex Roles, 52, 589–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3727-5

60.

Zee

K. S.

Bolger

(2019). Visible and invisible social support: How, why, and when. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28, 314–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419835214

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB