Benevolent Ideology and Women’s Economic Decision-Making: When Sexism Is Hurting Men’s Wallet

[en] Can ideology, as a widespread “expectation creator,” impact economic decisions? In two studies we investigated the influence of the Benevolent Sexism (BS) ideology (which dictates that men should provide for passive and nurtured women) on women’s economic decision- making. In Study 1, using a Dictator Game in which women decided how to share amounts of money with men, results of a Generalized Linear Mixed Model analysis show that higher endorsement of BS and contextual expectations of benevolence were associated with more very unequal offers. Similarly, in an Ultimatum Game in which women received monetary offers from men, Study 2’s Generalized Linear Mixed Model’s results revealed that BS led women to reject more very unequal offers. If women’s endorsement of BS ideology and expectations of benevolence prove contrary to reality, they may strike back at men. These findings show that BS ideology creates expectations that shape malefemale relationships in a way that could be prejudicial to men.

Research Center/Unit :

PsyNCog - Psychologie et Neuroscience Cognitives - ULiège

Disciplines :

Social, industrial & organizational psychology
Neurosciences & behavior

Author, co-author :

Silvestre, Aude ; Université de Liège > Département de Psychologie > Psychologie sociale

Sarlet, Marie

Huart, Johanne ; Université de Liège > Département de Psychologie > Psychologie sociale

Dardenne, Benoît ; Université de Liège > Département de Psychologie > Psychologie sociale

Language :

English

Title :

Benevolent Ideology and Women’s Economic Decision-Making: When Sexism Is Hurting Men’s Wallet

Publication date :

12 February 2016

Journal title :

PLoS ONE

eISSN :

1932-6203

Publisher :

Public Library of Science, San Franscisco, United States - California

Volume :

Issue :

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Funders :

F.R.S.-FNRS - Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique

Available on ORBi :

since 16 February 2016

Statistics

Number of views

168 (29 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

209 (15 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Sanfey AG. Expectations and social decision-making: Biasing effects of prior knowledge on ultimatum responses. Mind Soc. 2009;8:93-107. doi: 10.1007/s11299-009-0053-6
Chang LJ, Sanfey AG. Great expectations: Neural computations underlying the use of social norms in decision-making. Soc Cogn Affect Neuro. 2013;8:277-84. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr094
Brañas-Garza P, Rodriguez-Lara I. Expected generosity in one-shot interactions. Munich Personal RePEc Archive Paper No. 60046. 2014. Available: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen. de/60046/
Aguiar F, Brañas-Garza P, Cobo-Reyes R, Jimenez N, Miller LM. Are women expected to be more generous? Exp Econ. 2009;12(1):93-8. doi: 10.1007/s10683-008-9199-z
Chowdhury SM, Jeon J. Altruism, Anticipation, and Gender. UEA Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science Working Paper, 3-06. 2013. Available https://www.uea.ac.uk/menu/depts/eco/research/RePEc/uea/papers-pdf/UEA-CBESS-1306.pdf
Delacollette N, Dardenne B, Dumont M. Stéréotypes prescriptifs et avantages des groupes dominants. Ann Psychol. 2010;110:127-56.
Sarlet M, Dumont M, Delacollette N, Dardenne B. Prescription of protective paternalism for men in romantic and work contexts. Psychol Women Quart. 2012;36:444-57. doi: 10.1177/0361684312454842
Glick P & Fiske ST. An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. Am Psychol. 2001;56:109-18. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109 PMID: 11279804
Dardenne B, Dumont M, Bollier T. Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women's performance. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007;93:764-79. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764 PMID: 17983299
Dardenne B, Dumont M, Sarlet M, Phillips C, Balteau E, Luxen A, et al. Benevolent sexism alters executive brain responses. NeuroReport. 2013;24, 572-7. doi: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e3283625b5b PMID: 23660680
Dumont M, Sarlet M, Dardenne B. Be too kind to a woman, she'll feel incompetent: Benevolent sexism shifts self-construal and autobiographical memories toward incompetence. Sex Roles. 2010;62:545-53. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9582-4
Hebl MR, King EB, Glick P, Singletary SL, Kazama S. Hostile and benevolent reactions toward pregnant women: Complementary interpersonal punishments and rewards that maintain traditional roles. J Appl Psychol. 2007;92:1499-1511. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1499 PMID: 18020792
Viki GT, Abrams D. But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles. 2002;47:289-93. doi: 10.1023/A:1021342912248
Rudman LA, Glick P. Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999;77:1004-10. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1004 PMID: 10573877
Rudman LA, Glick P. Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. J Soc Issues. 2001;57:743-62. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00239
Jackman M. The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1994.
Moya M, Glick P, Expósito F, de Lemus S, Hart J. It's for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women's reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007;33:1421-34. doi: 10. 1177/0146167207304790 PMID: 17933737
Delacollette N, Dumont M, Sarlet M, Dardenne B. Benevolent sexism, men's advantages and prescription of warmth to women. Sex Roles. 2013;68:296-310. doi: 10.1007/s11199-012-0232-5
Glick P, Lameiras M, Fiske ST, Eckes T, Masser B, Volpato C, et al. Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 86:713-28. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514.86.5.713 PMID: 15161396
Expósito F, Herrera MC, Moya M, Glick P. Don't rock the boat: Women's benevolent sexism predicts fears of marital violence. Psychol Women Quart. 2010;34:36-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009. 01539.x
Fischer AR. Women's benevolent sexism as reaction to hostility. Psychol Women Quart. 2006;30:410-416. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00316.x
Phelan JE, Sanchez DT, Broccoli TL. The danger in sexism: The links among fears of crime, benevolent sexism, and well-being. Sex Roles. 2010;62; 35-47. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9711-8
Bolton GE, Zwick R. Anonymity versus punishment in ultimatum bargaining. Game Econ Behav. 1995;10:95-121. doi: 10.1006/game.1995.1026
Todorov A, Mende-Siedlecki P, Dotsch R. Social judgments from faces. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2013;23:373-80. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2012.12.010 PMID: 23347644
Todorov A, Pakrashi M, Oosterhof N. Evaluating faces on trustworthiness after minimal time exposure. Soc Cognition. 2009;27:813-33. doi: 10.1521/soco.2009.27.6.813
Güth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B. An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Behav Organ. 1982;3:367-88. doi: 10.1016/0167-2681 (82) 90011-7
Dardenne B, Delacollette N, Grégoire C, Lecocq D. Latent structure of the French validation of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: l'Echelle de Sexisme Ambivalent. Ann Psychol. 2006;106:235-64.
Glick P, Fiske ST. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996;70:491-512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
Inquisit 3.0.2.0. [Computer software]. Seattle, WA: Millisecond Software LLC; 2008.
Baayen RH, Davidson D, Bates D. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. J Mem Lang. 2008;59, 390-412. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Jaeger TF. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. J Mem Lang. 2008;59:434-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 PMID: 19884961
Judd CM, Westfall J, Kenny DA. Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012;103; 54-69. doi: 10.1037/a0028347 PMID: 22612667
Güth W. On ultimatum bargaining experiments-A personal review. J Econ Behav Organi. 1995;27:329-44.
Burgoyne C. Heart-strings and purse-strings: Money in heterosexual marriage. Fem Psychol. 2004;14:165-72. doi: 10.1177/0959353504040319
Bargad A, Hyde JS. Women's studies: A study of feminist identity development in women. Psychol Women Quart. 1991;15:181-201. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00791.x
Renzetti CM. New wave or second stage? Attitudes of college women toward feminism. Sex Roles. 1987;16:265-77. doi: 10.1007/BF00289954
Ben-Ner A, Kramer A, Levy O. Economic and hypothetical dictator game experiments: Incentive effects at the individual level. Journal of Socio-Econ. 2008;37:1775-84.
Bühren C, Kundt TC. Imagine being a nice guy: A note on hypothetical vs. incentivized social preferences. Judgm Decis Mak. 2015;10(2):185-190.
Engel C. Dictator games: a meta study. Exp Econ. 2011;14(4):583-610.
Forsythe R, Horowitz JL, Savin NE, Sefton M. Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Game Econ Behav. 1994;6:347-69.
Crockett M J, Clark L, Tabibnia G, Lieberman MD, Robbins TW. Serotonin modulates behavioral reactions to unfairness. Science. 2008;320:1739. doi: 10.1126/science.1155577 PMID: 18535210