Abstract
Previous evidence suggests that interventions that raise awareness of gender inequality might have the potential to challenge and undo well-anchored biases but, at the same time, might be threatening and provoke reactance against them. The effects of such interventions might also have a differential impact on women and men and vary depending on their level of neosexism and feminist identification. Extending previous research, two pre-registered studies (N = 1,895) were conducted to explore the differential effects of interventions that raise awareness of gender (in)equality with two frames (i.e., gender equality achievement vs. gender inequality persistence) on women’s and men’s attitudes toward women and gender equality. We also examined whether participants’ gender ideology moderates these effects via different psychological mechanisms (identity threat and cognitive unfreezing). Results indicated that for women, the gender inequality persistence framing is more effective (increases cognitive unfreezing) but potentially riskier (enhances identity threat) than the gender equality achievement framing. For men, the gender equality achievement framing seems especially effective as it reduced identity threat, although such effect is contingent on their gender ideology (feminist identification or/and neosexism). These findings have implications for the discourse of practitioners, politicians, and activists who might capitalize on the power of combining gender equality with gender inequality frames to improve attitudes toward women and gender equality depending on the specific goals, the context, and the target of the interventions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of Data and Materials
Raw data, Codebook, Supplementary Information (SI), Materials used and Preregistrations of Studies 1 and 2 are already available in the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/r4pzs/?view_only=d00453cdc2154a83a278bddb394c6304
References
Anisman-Razin, M., Kark, R., & Saguy, T. (2018). “Putting gender on the table”: Understanding reactions to women who discuss gender inequality. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 690–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217744648
Bar-Tal, D., Hameiri, B., & Halperin, E. (2021). Paradoxical thinking as a paradigm of attitude change in the context of intractable conflict. In B. Gawronski (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 129–187). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.11.003
Boring, A., & Philippe, A. (2021). Reducing discrimination in the field: Evidence from an awareness raising intervention targeting gender biases in student evaluations of teaching. Journal of Public Economics, 193, 104323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104323
Brambilla, M., Sacchi, S., Rusconi, P., & Goodwin, G. (2021). The primacy of morality in impression development: Theory, research, and future directions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 187–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.03.001
Branscombe, N. R., Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35–58). Blackwell Science.
Buckingham, S., Fiadzo, C., Dalla, V., Todaro, L., Dupont, C., & Hadjivassiliou, K. (2020). Precarious work from a gender and intersectionality perspective, and ways to combat it. Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs Directorate-General for Internal Policies (European Union). Retrieved June 18, 2022, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/662491/IPOL_STU(2020)662491_EN.pdf
Burgoon, M., Alvaro, E., Grandpre, J., & Voulodakis, M. (2002). Revisiting the theory of psychological reactance: Communicating threats to attitudinal freedom. In J. P. Dillard & M. W. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 213–232). Sage.
Cárdenas Castro, J. M., & Arancibia Martini, H. (2016). Potencia estadística y cálculo del tamaño del efecto en G*Power: Complementos a las pruebas de significación estadística y su aplicación en psicología. Salud & Sociedad, 5(2), 210–244. https://doi.org/10.22199/S07187475.2014.0002.00006
Case, K. A. (2007). Raising white privilege awareness and reducing racial prejudice: Assessing diversity course effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 34(4), 231–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701700250
Case, K. A., Hensley, R., & Anderson, A. (2014). Reflecting on heterosexual and male privilege: Interventions to raise awareness. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 722–740. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12088
Cheryan, S., Siy, J. O., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B. J., & Kim, S. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656–664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611405218
Cundiff, J. L., & Murray, S. L. (2020). Good intentions are not enough: Assessing a gender bias literacy intervention for potential positive and negative outcomes. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 26(6), 511–540. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2020032359
Cundiff, J. L., Ryuk, S., & Cech, K. (2018). Identity-safe or threatening? Perceptions of women-targeted diversity initiatives. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 745–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217740434
Cundiff, J. L., Zawadzki, M. J., Danube, C. L., & Shields, S. A. (2014). Using experiential learning to increase the recognition of everyday sexism as harmful: The WAGES intervention. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 703–721. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12087
de Lemus, S., Navarro, L., Velásquez, M. J., Ryan, E., & Megías, J. L. (2014). From sex to gender: A university intervention to reduce sexism in Argentina, Spain, and El Salvador. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), 741–762. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12089
Dillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72, 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500111815
Doolaard, F. T., Lelieveld, G. J., Noordewier, M. K., van Beest, I., & van Dijk, E. (2021). How information on sexism may increase women's perceptions of being excluded, threaten fundamental needs, and lower career motivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2825
Doosje, B., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one’s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872–886. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.4.872
Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S. M., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. C. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist, 67(3), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027260
Estevan-Reina, L., de Lemus, S., & Megías, J. L. (2020). Feminist or paternalistic: Understanding men’s motivations to confront sexism. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2988. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02988
European Institute of Gender Equality (EIGE). (2021). Gender Equality Index 2021. Factsheet Spain. Retrieved June 18, 2022, from https://eige.europa.eu/gender-equality-index/2021/country/ES
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G∗Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
Ferrer, V. A. (2017). Feminismo y psicología social [Feminism and social psychology]. Madrid: Grupo 5.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
Freedman, G., Green, M. C., Seidman, M., Flanagan, M., & McNamara, D. S. (2021). The effect of embodying a woman scientist in virtual reality on men’s gender biases. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000046
Hameiri, B., Nabet, E., Bar-Tal, D., & Halperin, E. (2018). Paradoxical thinking as a conflict-Resolution intervention: Comparison to alternative interventions and examination of psychological mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(1), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217736048
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (Methodology in the Social Sciences) (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Hennes, E. P., Pietri, E. S., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Mason, K. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Bayley, A. H., & Handelsman, J. (2018). Increasing the perceived malleability of gender bias using a modified Video Intervention for Diversity in STEM (VIDS). Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 788–809. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218755923
Huddy, L., Neely, F. K., & Lafay, M. R. (2000). Trends: Support for the women’s movement. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 309–350. https://doi.org/10.1086/317991
Hullett, C. R. (2005). The impact of mood on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 32(4), 423–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205277317
Kosakowska-Berezecka, N., Besta, T., Adamska, K., Jaśkiewicz, M., Jurek, P., & Vandello, J. A. (2016). If my masculinity is threatened I won’t support gender equality? The role of agentic self-stereotyping in restoration of manhood and perception of gender relations. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 17(3), 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000016
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.” Psychological Review, 103(2), 263–283. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263
Kteily, N., Saguy, T., Sidanius, J., & Taylor, D. M. (2013). Negotiating power: Agenda ordering and the willingness to negotiate in asymmetric intergroup conflicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 978–995. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034095
Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of ingroups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234
Leach, C. W., van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L. W., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B., Ouwerkerk, J. W., & Spears, R. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144
Liss, M., Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2004). Predictors and correlates of collective action. Sex Roles, 50, 771–779. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000029096.90835.3f
López-Rodríguez, L., Cuadrado, I., & Navas, M. (2013). Aplicación extendida del Modelo del Contenido de los Estereotipos (MCE) hacia tres grupos de inmigrantes en España [Extended application of the Stereotype Content Model (SCM) towards three immigrant groups in Spain]. Estudios De Psicología, 34(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1174/021093913806751375
Martínez, C., & Paterna-Bleda, C. (2013). Masculinity ideology and gender equality: Considering neosexism. Anales De Psicología, 29, 558–564. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.2.141311
Morgenroth, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2018a). Addressing gender inequality: Stumbling blocks and roads ahead. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(5), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218786079
Morgenroth, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2018b). Quotas and affirmative action: Understanding group-based outcomes and attitudes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(3), e12374. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12374
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Pietri, E. S., Hennes, E. P., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Roussos, G., & Handelsman, J. (2018). Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (Video Interventions for Diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24, 236–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000144
Moss-Racusin, C. A., van der Toorn, J., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2016). A “scientific diversity” intervention to reduce gender bias in a sample of life scientists. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-09-0187
Moya, M., & Expósito, F. (2001). Nuevas formas, viejos intereses. Neosexismo en varones españoles [New forms, old interests: Neosexism among Spanish men]. Psicothema, 13, 668–674.
Petty, R. E., Schumann, D. W., Richman, S. A., & Strathman, A. J. (1993). Positive mood and persuasion: Different roles for affect under high- and low-elaboration conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.1.5
Pietri, E. S., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Guha, D., Roussos, G., Brescoll, V. L., & Handelsman, J. (2017). Using video to increase gender bias literacy toward women in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41, 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316674721
Pratto, F., & Walker, A. (2004). The bases of gendered power. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 242–268). The Guilford Press.
PytlikZillig, L. M., Hutchens, M. J., Muhlberger, P., Gonzalez, F. J., & Tomkins, A. J. (2018). Attitude change and polarization. In Deliberative Public Engagement with Science. SpringerBriefs in Psychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78160-0_4
Rains, S. A. (2013). The nature of psychological reactance revisited: A meta-analytic review. Human Communication Research, 39, 47–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01443.x
Ross, L., Lepper, M., & Ward, A. (2010). History of social psychology: Insights, challenges, and contributions to theory and application. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 3–50). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001001
Roy, R. E., Weibust, K. S., & Miller, C. T. (2007). Effects of stereotypes about feminists on feminist self-identification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(2), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00348.x
Rusconi, P., Sacchi, S., Brambilla, M., Capellini, R., & Cherubini, P. (2020). Being honest and acting consistently: Boundary conditions of the negativity effect in the attribution of morality. Social Cognition, 38, 146–178. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2020.38.2.146
Ruthig, J., Kehn, A., Gamblin, B., Vanderzanden, K., & Jones, K. (2017). When women’s gains equal men’s losses: Predicting a zero-sum perspective of gender status. Sex Roles, 76(1–2), 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0651-9
Saguy, T., & Szekeres, H. (2018). Changing minds via collective action: Exposure to the 2017 Women’s March predicts decrease in (some) men’s gender system justification over time. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217750475
Sayans‐Jiménez, P., Rojas, A. J., & Cuadrado, I. (2017). Is it advisable to include negative attributes to assess the stereotype content? Yes, but only in the morality dimension. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 58(2), 170–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12346
Sczesny, S., Formanowicz, M., & Moser, F. (2016). Can gender-fair language reduce gender stereotyping and discrimination? Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 25. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00025
Shnabel, N., & Nadler, A. (2015). The role of agency and morality in reconciliation processes: The perspective of the needs-based model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), 477–483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415601625
Sidanius, J., Sinclair, S., & Pratto, F. (2006). Social dominance orientation, gender, and increasing educational exposure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1640–1653. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00074.x
Spoor, J. R., & Schmitt, M. T. (2011). “Things are getting better” isn’t always better: Considering women’s progress affects perceptions of and reactions to contemporary gender inequality. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2010.539948
Stewart, A. L. (2017). Men’s collective action willingness: Testing different theoretical models of protesting gender inequality for women and men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 18(4), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000068
Tadmor, C. T., Hong, Y. Y., Chao, M. M., Wiruchnipawan, F., & Wang, W. (2012). Multicultural experiences reduce intergroup bias through epistemic unfreezing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(5), 750–772. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029719
Tellhed, U., & Jansson, A. (2018). Communicating gender-equality progress, reduces social identity threats for women considering a research career. Social Sciences, 7(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7020018
Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M., & Joly, S. (1995). Neosexism: Plus ça change, plus c’est pareil. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(8), 842–849. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295218007
Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M., & St-Pierre, L. (1999). Neosexism among women: The role of personally experienced social mobility attempts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(12), 1487–1497. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672992510005
Valved, T., Kosakowska-Berezecka, N., Besta, T., & Martiny, S. E. (2021). Gender belief systems through the lens of culture—Differences in precarious manhood beliefs and reactions to masculinity threat in Poland and Norway. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 22(2), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000331
Van Bavel, J. J., & Pereira, A. (2018). The partisan brain: An identity-based model of political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004
van Breen, J. A., Gocłowska, M. A., de Lemus, S., Baas, M., Kelleci, B., & Spears, R. (2021). Creativity for the group: Distinctive feminists engage in divergent thinking when acting on behalf of women. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(4), 461–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620926414
van Breen, J. A., Spears, R., Kuppens, T., & de Lemus, S. (2017). A multiple identity approach to gender: Identification with women, identification with feminists, and their interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1019. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01019
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behaviour. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 55–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7
Zawadzki, M. J., Shields, S. A., Danube, C. L., & Swim, J. K. (2014). Reducing the endorsement of sexism using experiential learning: The Workshop Activity for Gender Equity Simulation (WAGES). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684313498573
Funding
This publication is part of the projects PID2019-105114 GB-I00, funded by MCIN/ AEI /10.13039/501100011033, UAL18-SEJ-D007-B, funded by UAL/CECEU/FEDER, and P18-RT-668, funded by CECEU/FEDER.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The four authors have made significant contributions in the different stages of the present work.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
The current work has been conducted in a manner consistent with the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles in the Conduct of Research with Human Participants (2010). Approval from the University of Almería Ethics Committee was obtained before data collection (Ref: UALBIO2019/016).
Consent to Participate
In all studies, the participants gave their informed consent to participate in the research.
Competing Interests
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cuadrado, I., Constantin, A.A., López-Rodríguez, L. et al. Achieving Equality or Persisting Inequality: Effects of Framing of Equality on Attitudes Toward Women and Gender Equality Through Identity Threat and Cognitive Unfreezing. Sex Roles 90, 126–150 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01432-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01432-3