This study examined perspective taking, empathic concern, and attitude toward women as potential mediators of age and gender effects on college students’ attitudes toward sexist language. Perspective taking fully mediated the small age effect found in men. Attitude toward women partially mediated the gender effect, reducing it by 51%.Empathic concern mediated neither age nor gender effects.
Alterman, A. I., McDermott, P. A., Cacciola, J. S., & Rutherford, M. J. (2003). Latent structure of the Davis Interpersonal Reactivity Index in methadone maintenance patients. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 25, 257-265.
2.
American Heritage Book of English Usage: A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. (1996). Sexist language and assumptions. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.bartleby.com/64/5.html
3.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4.
Briere, J., & Lanktree, C. (1983). Sex-role related effects of sex bias in language. Sex Roles, 9, 625-632.
5.
Campbell, B., Schellenberg, E. G., & Senn, C. Y. (1997). Evaluating measures of contemporary sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 89-102.
6.
Carter, A. (1980). The language of the sisterhood. In L. Michaels & C. Ricks (Eds.), The state of the language (pp. 226-234). Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
Cliffordson, C. (2002). The hierarchical structure of empathy: Dimensional organization and relations to social functioning. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 43, 49-59.
8.
Constantine, M. G., & Gainor, K. A. (2001). Emotional intelligence and empathy: Their relation to multicultural counseling knowledge and awareness. Professional School Counseling, 5, 131-137.
9.
Davis, M. H. (1979). Individual differences in empathy: A multidimensional approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
10.
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113-126.
11.
Davis, M. H. (1996). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Boulder, CO: Westview.
12.
Davis, M. H., & Franzoi, S. L. (1991). Stability and change in adolescent self-consciousness and empathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 70-87.
13.
Davis, M. H., & Oathout, H. A. (1987). Maintenance of satisfaction in romantic relationships: Empathy and relational competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 397-410.
14.
Dayhoff, S. A. (1983). Sexist language and person perception: Evaluation of candidates from newspaper articles. Sex Roles, 9, 527-539.
15.
Graglia, F. C. (1998). Domestic tranquility: A brief against feminism. Dallas, TX: Spence Publishing.
16.
Hamilton, M. C. (1991). Masculine bias in the attribution of personhood. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 393-402.
17.
Hyde, J. S. (1984). Children’s understanding of sexist language. Developmental Psychology, 20, 697-706.
18.
Kingston, A. J., & Loveless, T. L. (1977). Guidelines for authors: A new form of censorship?Journal of Reading Behavior, 9, 89-93.
19.
Kleinman, S. (2002). Why sexist language matters. Qualitative Sociology, 25, 299-304.
20.
Loudin, J. L., Loukas, A., & Robinson, S. (2003). Relational aggression in college students: Examining the roles of social anxiety and empathy. Aggressive Behavior, 29, 430-439.
21.
Matheson, K., & Kristiansen, C. M. (1987). The effect of sexist attitudes and social structure on the use of sex-biased pronouns. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 395-398.
22.
McConnell, A. R., & Fazio, R. H. (1996). Women as men and people: Effects of gender-marked language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1004-1013.
23.
McMinn, M. R., Lindsay, S. F., Hannum, L. E., & Troyer, P. K. (1990). Does sexist language reflect personal characteristics?Sex Roles, 23, 389-396.
24.
McMinn, M. R., Troyer, P. K., Hannum, L. E., & Foster, J. D. (1991). Teaching nonsexist language to college students. Journal of Experimental Education, 59, 153-161.
25.
Merritt, R. D., & Kok, C. J. (1995). Attribution of gender to a gender-unspecified individual: An evaluation of the people = male hypothesis. Sex Roles, 33, 145-157.
26.
Miller, C., & Swift, K. (1988). The handbook of nonsexist writing (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
27.
Ng, S. H. (1990). Androcentric coding of man and his in memory by language users. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 455-464.
28.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (1998a). Contemporary arguments against nonsexist language: Blaubergs (1980) revisited. Sex Roles, 39, 445-461.
29.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (1998b). Influence of age, gender, and context on attitudes toward sexist/nonsexist language: Is sport a special case?Sex Roles, 38, 477-494.
30.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (2000). Development and validation of an instrument to measure attitudes toward sexist/nonsexist language. Sex Roles, 42, 415-438.
31.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (2001). Erratum: Inventory of Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language-General (IASNL-G): A correction in scoring procedures. Sex Roles, 44, 253.
32.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (2002). The gender gap in student attitudes toward sexist/nonsexist language: Implications for sport management education. Journal of Sport Management, 16, 190-208.
33.
Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (2004). Attitudes toward women mediate the gender effect on attitudes toward sexist language. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 233-239.
34.
Perez-Albeniz, A., & de Paul, J. (2003). Dispositional empathy in high- and low-risk parents for child physical abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 27, 769-780.
35.
Peterson, E. E. (1994). Nonsexist language reform and “political correctness” [electronic version]. Women and Language, 17, 6-10.
36.
Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2004). Calculation for the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.unc.edu/%7Epreacher/sobel/sobel.htm
37.
Pulos, S., Elison, J., & Lennon, R. (2004). The hierarchical structure of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Social Behavior and Personality, 32, 355-360.
38.
Ravitch, D. (2004). The language police: How pressure groups restrict what students learn. New York: Vintage.
39.
Rubin, D. L., & Greene, K. L. (1991). Effects of biological and psychological gender, age cohort, and interviewer gender on attitudes toward gender-inclusive/exclusive language. Sex Roles, 24, 391-412.
40.
Schau, C. G., & Scott, K. P. (1984). Impact of gender characteristics of instructional materials: An integration of the research literature. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 183-193.
41.
Shaw, S., & Hoeber, L. (2003). “A strong man is direct and a direct woman is a bitch”: Gendered discourses and their influence on employment roles in sport organizations. Journal of Sport Management, 17, 347-375.
42.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models [electronic version]. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290-312.
43.
Spender, D. (1990). Man made language (2nd ed.). London: Pandora.
44.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp.7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
45.
Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M., & Joly, S. (1995). Neosexism: Plus ça change, plus c’est pareil. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 842-849.
46.
Unger, L. S., & Thumuluri, L. K. (1997). Trait empathy and continuous helping: The case of voluntarism. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 785-800.
