Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (620,000)
UTSG (50,000)
PSY (4,000)

Sociocultural Approach

Course Code
Alison Chasteen

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 6 pages of the document.
PSY322 Lecture 02: Sociocultural Approach
Readings: Lavine, Sweeney, & Wagner (1999), Iijima, Hall & Crum (1994)
- Gender Stereotypes
o Trends in Print Media
o Effects of TV ads & sitcoms
Face-isms, objectification
x Cognitive and behavioral consequences
Body image, female weight
- Diversity in TV ads t not as much research compared to with gender!
Gender Stereotypes in Print Media
- What do we see in ads published in print media?
o XPX<]ouP^}oµ]}vW^dZKoPz}µ[oo µooÇ>}À_
Bag NOT main picture
Unflattering portrayal of old women
No head! t Z(}v}ÁÇ}^uv]Ì_}Ç
o E.g. In-flight Magazine Ad: Sony Noise-cancelling Headphones
Old woman are annoying
No heads! t oÁ]Z^uPZ}v_
- t}uv[}Çparts > faces
- Dv[(E}]~Z(}KWWK^/d}(Á}uv[
- Frequency of appearance
- Implications of face-isms
o Stereotypes of women (transmitted in ads)
Less face-ism
- More likely to show man to promote object, as well as face; if women, show more body
Gender Stereotypes in TV Ads
- Do we see similar stereotyping in television commercials?
Iijima Hall and Crum (1994) KEYWORD = Tv ads study
o Beer commercials
o Few minorities app]v~](ZÇ}UµµooÇ^lP}µv_
o More men than women in ads
o Chest shots: men < women
49% woman (chest shot) vs. 24% man (chest shot)
o Body shots: men < women
Twice as many of women than men
o Implications?
Women seen as BODY not HUMAN
Women: exterior > interior, de-humanizing
- CURRENTLY: see a shift to men ads focusing on body image (buff)

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Effects of Exposure to Sexist TV Ads
- What are the cognitive and behavioral outcomes of exposure?
Gender Stereotypes in TV Ads: Reading 01
Rudman and Borgida (1995) KEYWORD = Interview study
o tZ((}Æ]]uPZÀ}v}o[cognitions and behaviors?
o Method:
Sample: Undergraduate men (~50-60 @ 25-30 per condition)
Design: Sexist video vs. control (videos)
x Rate 20 ads on several dimensions (rate like/dislike)
x Lexical decision task: sexist words and sexual double entendres (e.g. cherry,
easy t see response time after sexist/control ads)
o Lexical task: word/non-word task; indicate if string of letters form a
o Hypothesis: faster to identify as words if shown SEXIST ads
x Interview a female candidate for a job ~}oo^ZÀ]}_VP]Àvµ
to ask questions; observed comments, etc. towards female candidate)
x Lexical Decision Task
o Reaction Time vs. Type of Word
o Conditions (#bars per independent [x] variable) = Sexist, Control
o Sexist = babe, bimbo; Nonsexist = sister, mother; Double = cherry,
easy; Neutral; Non-words
o Sexist condition: FASTER response than control group
o More SLOWLY with nonsexist words than control group
WHY: sexist images activate concepts and thoughts in minds,
thus less space for nonsexist words
x Recall Results t ^t]}ÁvuµZÇ}µvoo}µ(uo
o Mean Recall Scores vs. Appearance / Bio Info / # Written (a.k.a.
o Conditions = Sexist, Control
o Sexist group focused on APPEARANCE
o Therefore, additional evidence that cognitive impact of exposure to
such ads!
x Social Judgments
o Mean Competence Rating vs. Sexist/Control
o Sexist rated candidate as LESS COMPETENT (probably focused on
APPEARANCE over Bio and Qualifications)
x Sexualized Behavior (towards female candidate/confederate)
o How often felt participant (P) look at body, how sexually motivated P
was, how sexist P seemed
o DvZ]vPÀX}v(~^v]_
/Proximity/Dominance/Sexual Behavior
NOTE: Proximity+Dominance+Sexual Behavior measured by
observers (3rd party)
x Observers watched video of participants (Ps) toward
o LOWER means BUT sexist > control in
ratings still!!!
o Conditions = Sexist, Control
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version