In contrast to earlier studies samples of both males and females selected more attractive photographs as being of supporters of the Feminist Movement and less attractive photos as being of non-supporters. This related to subjects' attitudes toward women but did not interact with the perception of activism within the movement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ben, S. L.The measurement of psychological androgyny . Journal of Consuiting and Clinical Psychology, 1974, 42, 155-162.
2.
Berscheid, E. , & Walster, E.Physical attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 7, New York: Academic Press, 1974, pp.157-215.
3.
Brundage, L. E. , Derlega, V. J., & Cash, T. F.The effects of physical attractiveness and need for approval on self-disclosure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1977, 3, 63-66.
4.
Goldberg, P. A. , Gottesdiener, M., & Abramson, P. R.Another put-down of women? Perceived attractiveness as a function of support for the feminist movement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 113-115.
5.
Goldman, W. , & Lewis, P.Beautiful is good: Evidence that the physically attractive are more socially skillful. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977, 13, 125-130.
6.
Izzett, R. , & Fishman, L.Defendent sentences as a function of attractiveness and justification for actions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 1976, 100, 285-290.
7.
Johnson, R. W. , Doiron, D., Brooks, G., & Dickinson, J.Perceived attractiveness as a function of support for the feminist movement: Not necessarily a put-down of women. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 1978, 10, 214-221.
8.
Spence, J. T. , & Helmreich, R.The attitudes toward women scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. Journal SuppZement Abstract Service, 1972, 2, 66.
