The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males

1
The Effects of Co-Education on Levels of
Benevolent Sexism in College-Age Males

• Sarah Kemp Ruth Hudgens
• Hanover College

2
Introduction

• Differences in levels of Sexism between
  single-sex and co-educational high schools (Lee,
  Marks, Byrd, 1994)
• Contact Hypothesis (Stephan, 1985)
• 1. Equal Status
• 2. Personal Interaction
• 3. Achieve Goals through Cooperative
  Activities
• 4. Social Norms Relevant Authorities

3
Intro cont.

• Sex Role Attitudes Egalitarian vs. Traditional
  (Vanyperen Buunk, 1991)
• Benevolent Sexism Encompasses subjectively
  positive (for the sexist) attitudes toward women
  in traditional roles (Glick Fiske, 1997)

4
Hypotheses

• Male subjects who attended co-educational high
  schools will display lower levels of benevolent
  sexism than those who attended single-sex high
  schools.
• Male subjects who have more traditional sex role
  attitudes will display higher levels of
  benevolent sexism than males who have more
  egalitarian sex role attitudes.

5
Method

• Participants students at a small liberal arts
  college in the Midwest
• 91 subjects 58 females 33 males
• Subjects were recruited either individually or
  through Resident Assistants according to living
  unit

6
Method-Materials

• Ambivalent Sexism Inventory 22-item Likert
  scale (0strongly disagree/5strongly agree)
• Ex Women should be cherished and protected by
  men. (Glick Fiske, 1997)
• Sex Role Attitudes Scale 40-item Likert scale
• Ex A Woman who pursues a career cannot be a
  good mother
• Demographics

7
Procedure

• Participant selection
• Consent form
• Survey 15 minutes
• Debriefing and contact information

8
Results

• Men from single-sex high schools did not show
  significantly higher levels of benevolent sexism
  than men from co-ed high schools (One-Way ANOVA
  n.s.)
• No correlation between mens benevolent sexism
  and sex role attitude

9
Results/ Discussion

• Range of Benevolent Sexism was from 14 to 44
  Womens M26.62, Mens M27.58
• Men were more egalitarian (M100.06) than women
  (M94.24), with a range of 75 to 150

10
Discussion

• Small Sample Size not enough power
• Homogeneity of small college
• Conditions of contact hypothesis were not met by
  the high school
• Sex role attitudes of campus women may not be
  egalitarian enough.
• May have been obvious what our scale was
  measuring.

11
Future Research

• Larger, more diverse sample
• Co-residential living units- more interaction
  with women
• Questions concerning conditions of h.s.- contact
  hypothesis