A Critical Evaluation of Intervention Studies for Reducing Sexism and a Suggestion for a Classification

Abstract

Gender stereotypes and sexism has been a topic of discussion in politics and social psychology since the 1960s. The relationships between sexism and various social-psychological variables, as well as the effects of sexism and gender stereotypes on life satisfaction and accessibility of educational opportunities, have been examined. Therefore, previous research on sexism-reduction intervention has not reached a consensus. The major goal of this research is to review intervention studies and the current literature on the effects of sexism, as well as draw attention to the theoretical and methodological limitations of intervention studies and suggest a new classification model for future studies. According to this classification model, intervention studies addressing sexism can be classified into four basic dimensions: (1) intervention to the process of perceiving a stimulus containing sex information; (2) intervention to (implicitly or explicitly) the process of binding sex information to traits; (3) intervention to (explicit, subtle or implicit) sexist attitudes; and (4) intervention to sexist behavior. The essential aims of this model are to reduce the conceptual challenges and discrepancy between the findings and minimize the low comparability of such findings in the intervention studies. Considering various dimensions categorically and the transactions between the dimensions suggested in this model can contribute to the cumulative progress of relevant literature by providing comparable standards for results from different intervention studies. However, this model can facilitate an understanding of not only contradictory patterns of different intervention methods on various dimensions (e.g., reducing sexism on one dimension and increasing on another dimension) but also the complex relationships between sexist attitudes and behaviors. Lastly, the suggested four-dimension classification model was discussed within the scope of sexism theories and empirical intervention studies; focusing on sexism.

Keywords

• Gender stereotypes
• ambivalent sexism
• implicit sexism
• intervention studies
• the model for classification of sexism

Cinsiyetçiliği Azaltmaya Yönelik Müdahale Çalışmalarına İlişkin Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme ve Bir Sınıflandırma Önerisi

Abstract

Toplumsal cinsiyet kalıp yargıları ve cinsiyetçilik, politika düzeyinde 60’lardan, sosyal psikoloji alanyazınında ise 70’lerden itibaren mesele haline getirilmiştir. Cinsiyetçiliğin pek çok sosyal psikolojik değişkenle olan ilişkileri ve yaşam doyumu, eğitim imkanları gibi pek çok yaşamsal konudaki etkileri uzun yıllardır çalışılıyor olsa da cinsiyetçiliği azaltmaya yönelik müdahale çalışmalarına bakıldığında alanyazının henüz bir uzlaşıya varamadığı görülmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, alanyazında cinsiyetçiliğin etkilerinin halen sürdüğünü gösteren güncel çalışmaları ve müdahale çalışmalarını derlemenin yanı sıra, müdahale çalışmalarında gözlenen yöntemsel ve kuramsal kısıtlılıklara işaret ederek gelecek çalışmalar için yeni bir sınıflandırma modeli önermektir. Sınıflandırma modeline göre cinsiyetçiliği azaltmayı hedefleyen müdahale çalışmaları, (1) cinsiyet belirten bir uyaranın algılanması sürecine müdahale (2) cinsiyet bilgisinin (örtük veya açık bir şekilde) kişilik özellikleriyle (veya rollerle) ilişkilendirilmesi sürecine müdahale (3) (açık, gizil veya örtük) cinsiyetçi tutumlara müdahale ve (4) cinsiyetçi davranışlara müdahale olmak üzere dört temel boyutta ele alınabilir. Bu modelin temel amacı cinsiyetçiliği azaltmayı hedefleyen müdahale çalışmalarında gözlenen kavramsal dağınıklık, bulguların uyuşmazlığı ve düşük karşılaştırılabilirlik gibi sorunları en aza indirgemektir. Müdahale çalışmalarında bu modelin hesaba katılması, modelin öngördüğü boyutların hem tek tek hem de birbirleri ile geçişlilikleri çerçevesinde ele alınıp, elde edilen bulguların karşılaştırılabilirliğine katkı sağlayarak alanyazının birikimli ilerlemesine yardımcı olabilir. Ayrıca kullanılan müdahale tekniklerinin cinsiyetçiliğin farklı boyutlarında farklı örüntülerle etki göstermesine (örn., cinsiyetçiliğin bir boyutunda azalmaya, başka bir boyutunda ise artmaya sebep olması) yol açan potansiyel sebeplerin tespit edilmesi ve cinsiyetçi tutumlar ve davranışlar arasındaki karmaşık ilişkilerin anlaşılması kolaylaşabilir. Son olarak, önerilen dört boyutlu sınıflandırma modeli, cinsiyetçiliği konu alan kuramlar ve müdahale çalışmaları çerçevesinde yapılandırılarak tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

• Toplumsal cinsiyet kalıp yargıları
• çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik
• örtük cinsiyet kalıp yargıları
• cinsiyetçilik
• müdahale çalışmaları
• sınıflandırma modeli

References

1. Aberson, C. L. ve Haag, S. C. (2007). Contact, perspective taking, and anxiety as predictors of stereotype endorsement, explicit attitudes, and implicit attitudes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(2), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207074726. google scholar
2. Agerström, J. ve Rooth, D. O. (2011). The role of automatic obesity stereotypes in real hiring discrimination. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 790-805. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021594. google scholar
3. Allport, G. W., Clark, K. ve Pettigrew, T. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Perseus Books. google scholar
4. Armitage, C. J. ve Christian, J. (2003). From attitudes to behaviour: Basic and applied research on the theory of planned behaviour. Current Psychology, 22(3), 187-195. google scholar
5. Armitage, C. J. ve Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471-499. google scholar
6. Avcil, C. (2020). Kadın bedeni üzerinde denetim aracı olarak namus cinayetleri: Türkiye örneği. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences (IJSHS), 4(3), 137-150. google scholar
7. Ayhan, H. Ö. (2001). Statistics by gender: Measures to reduce gender bias in agricultural surveys. International Statistical Review, 69(3), 447-460. google scholar
8. Bargh, J. A., Chen, M. ve Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244. google scholar

9. Basford, T. E., Offermann, L. R. ve Behrend, T. S. (2014). Do you see what I see? Perceptions of gender microaggressions in the workplace. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(3), 340-349. https://doi. org/ 10.1177/0361684313511420. google scholar
10. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354-364. google scholar
11. Benokraitis, N. V. ve Feagin, J. R. (1995). Modern sexism: Blatant, subtle, and covert discrimination. Prentice Hall. google scholar
12. Berryman, K. L. (2020). Decreasing women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Chicago: Loyola University. google scholar
13. Berthold, A., Steffens, M. C. ve Mummendey, A. (2019). What did they say? How subgroup stereotypes influence memory for superordinate groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 83, 23-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.02.007. google scholar
14. Bilgin, N. (2014). Sosyal psikoloji (5. Baskı). Ege Üniversitesi Yayınları. google scholar
15. Blair, I. V. ve Banaji, M. R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1142-1163. google scholar
16. Blair, I. V., Ma, J. E. ve Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: the moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(5), 828-841. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.828. google scholar
17. Bodenhausen, G. V. (1990). Stereotypes as judgmental heuristics: Evidence of circadian variations in discrimination. Psychological Science, 1(5), 319-322. google scholar
18. Bolak-Boratav, H. (2011). Searching for feminism in psychology in Turkey. R. Rutherford, R. Capdevila, U. Vindhya, ve I. Palmary, (Ed.), Handbook of international feminisms: Perspectives on psychology, women, culture, and rights içinde (s. 17-36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9869-9_2. google scholar
19. Bolak-Boratav, H. (2021). Feminizm ve psikoloji: Sıkıntılı bir ilişki. Reflektif, 2 (1), 143-163. https:// doi.org/10.47613/reflektif.2021.19. google scholar
20. Boyacıoğlu, İ. (2016). Dünden bugüne Türkiye’de kadına yönelik şiddet ve ulusal kadın çalışmaları: Psikolojik araştırmalara davet. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 19, 126-145. google scholar
21. Bravo, M. J., Gilbert, L. A. ve Kearney, L. K. (2003). Interventions for promoting gender equitable technology use in classrooms. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(4), 95-109. google scholar
22. Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., Rosenkrantz, P. S. ve Vogel, S. R. (1970). Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 1-7. google scholar
23. Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E. ve Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972). Sex-role google scholar
24. stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of SocialIssues, 28, 59-78. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1972. tb00018.x. google scholar
25. Campbell, B., Schellenberg, E. G. ve Senn, C. Y. (1997). Evaluating measures of contemporary sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(1), 89-102. google scholar
26. Carnes, M., Devine, P. G., Isaac, C., Manwell, L. B., Ford, C. E., Byars-Winston, A., ... ve Sheridan, J. (2012). Promoting institutional change through bias literacy. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 5(2), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028128. google scholar
27. Carrascosa, L., Cava Caballero, M. J., Buelga Vasquez, S. ve Jesus, S. N. D. (2019). Reduction of sexist attitudes, romantic myths, and aggressive behaviors in adolescents: Efficacy of the DARSI program. Psicothema, 2019, 31(2), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.245. google scholar
28. Case, K. A., Hensley, R. ve Anderson, A. (2014). Reflecting on heterosexual and male privilege: Interventions to raise awareness. Journal ofSocial Issues, 70(4), 722-740. https://doi.org/10.1111/ josi.12088. google scholar
29. Charlesworth, T. E., Yang, V., Mann, T. C., Kurdi, B. ve Banaji, M. R. (2021). Gender stereotypes in natural language: Word embeddings show robust consistency across child and adult language corpora of more than 65 million words. Psychological Science, 32(2), 218-240. https://doi. org/10.1177/0956797620963619. google scholar
30. Chen, M. ve Bargh, J. A. (1997). Non-conscious behavioral confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology, 33(5), 541-560. google scholar
31. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989, 139-167. google scholar
32. Cundiff, J. L., Zawadzki, M. J., Danube, C. L. ve 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. google scholar
33. Dang, H. A. H. ve Nguyen, C. V. (2021). Gender inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic: Income, expenditure, savings, and job loss. World Development, 140, 105296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. worlddev.2020.105296. google scholar
34. Dasgupta, N. ve Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology, 40(5), 642-658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003. google scholar
35. de Lemus, S., Navarro, L., J. Velasquez, M., Ryan, E. ve Meg^as, 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. google scholar
36. de Oliveira Laux, S. H., Ksenofontov, I. ve Becker, J. C. (2015). Explicit but not implicit sexist beliefs predict benevolent and hostile sexist behavior. European Journal ofSocial Psychology, 45(6), 702715. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2128. google scholar
37. Diekman, A. B., ve Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(10), 1171-1188. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262001. google scholar
38. Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5-18. google scholar
39. Drury, B. J. ve Kaiser, C. R. (2014). Allies against sexism: The role of men in confronting sexism. Journal ofSocial Issues, 70(4), 637-652. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12083. google scholar
40. Duehr, E. E. veBono, J. E.(2006). Men, women, and managers:are stereotypesfinallychanging?. Personnel Psychology, 59(4), 815-846. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00055.x. google scholar
41. Eagly, A. H. ve Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(4), 543-558. google scholar
42. Eagly, A. H. ve Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 735-754. google scholar
43. ECOSOC U. (2019) Special edition: progress towards the sustainable development goals report of the secretary-general. Advanced unedited version. New York: United Nations. google scholar
44. Fazio, R. H. ve Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 297-327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. psych.54.101601.145225. google scholar
45. Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T. ve Lindzey G., (Ed.), The handbook of socialpsychology içinde (s. 357-411). McGraw-Hill. google scholar
46. Fredrickson, B. L. ve Roberts, T. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206. google scholar
47. Freedman, G., Seidman, M., Flanagan, M., Kaufman, G. ve Green, M. C. (2018). The impact of an “aha” moment on gender biases: Limited evidence for the efficacy of a game intervention that challenges gender assumptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 162-167. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.014. google scholar
48. Gaertner, S. L. ve Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. Academic Press. google scholar
49. Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491-512. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491. google scholar
50. Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109-118. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109. google scholar
51. Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(3), 530-535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311414832. google scholar
52. Goclowska, M. A., Crisp, R. J. ve Labuschagne, K. (2013). Can counter-stereotypes boost flexible thinking?. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(2), 217-231. https://doi. org/10.1177/1368430212445076. google scholar
53. Good, J. J. ve Woodzicka, J. A. (2010). Reducing approval of benevolent sexism: An educational intervention. The New School Psychology Bulletin, 7(1), 16-30. google scholar
54. Greenwald, A. G. ve Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological review, 102(1), 4-27. google scholar
55. Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R. ve Nosek, B. A. (2015). Statistically small effects of the Implicit Association Test can have societally large effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(4), 553-561. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000016. google scholar
56. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E. ve Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464-1480. google scholar
57. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., ve Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 17-41. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015575. google scholar
58. Gupta, V. K., Turban, D. B. ve Bhawe, N. M. (2008). The effect of gender stereotype activation google scholar
59. on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1053-1061. https://doi. org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1053. google scholar
60. Hill, S. E. ve Flom, R. (2007). 18-and 24-month-olds’ discrimination of gender consistent and inconsistent activities. Infant Behavior and Development, 30(1), 168-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. infbeh.2006.08.003. google scholar
61. Hilliard, L. J. ve Liben, L. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms: Effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup bias. Child Development, 81(6), 1787-1798. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01510.x. google scholar
62. Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H. ve Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the Implicit Association Test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369-1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205275613. google scholar
63. Hong, Z. R., Lin, H. S. ve Veach, P. M. (2008). Effects of an extracurricular science intervention on science performance, self-worth, social skills, and sexist attitudes of Taiwanese adolescents from single-parent families. Sex Roles, 59(7-8), 555-567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9453-z. google scholar
64. Huang, L. M. ve Sherman, J. W. (2018). Attentional processes in social perception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 58, 199-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2018.03.002. google scholar
65. Hugenberg, K. ve Bodenhausen, G. V. (2004). Ambiguity in social categorization: The role of prejudice and facial affect in race categorization. Psychological Science, 15(5), 342-345. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00680.x. google scholar
66. Isaac, C., Lee, B. ve Carnes, M. (2009). Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: A systematic review. Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 84(10), 1440-1446. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b6ba00. google scholar
67. Jackson, S. M. (2016). The influence of implicit and explicit gender bias on grading and the effectiveness of rubrics for reducing bias (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ohio: Wright State University. google scholar
68. Jost, J. T. ve Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 88, 498-509. google scholar
69. Kandiyoti, D. (1982). Kadınlarda psiko-sosyal değişim: Kuşaklar arasında bir karşılaştırma. türk toplumunda kadın. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dizisi, 1, 311-339. google scholar
70. Kawakami, K., Dovidio, J. F. ve Kamp, S. (2007). The impact of counterstereotypic training and related correction processes on the application of stereotypes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(2), 139-156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207074725. google scholar
71. Kılıç, A. Z., Beyazova, A., Akbaş, H. M., Zara, A., ve Serhatlı, İ. (2014). Okul çağı çocuklarının toplumsal cinsiyet algıları: Gündelik yaşam örnekleriyle cinsiyetçiliğin benimsenme durumuna ve esneyebilme olasılığına dair bir araştırma. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17(2), 121-151. https:// doi.org/10.18490/sosars.379175. google scholar
72. Kilmartin, C., Semelsberger, R., Dye, S., Boggs, E. ve Kolar, D. (2015). A behavior intervention to reduce sexism in college men. Gender Issues, 32(2), 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-014-9130-1. google scholar
73. Kilmartin, C., Smith, T., Green, A., Heinzen, H., Kuchler, M. ve Kolar, D. (2008). A real time social norms intervention to reduce male sexism. Sex Roles, 59(4), 264-273. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11199-008-9446-y. google scholar
74. Klonoff, E. A., Landrine, H. ve Campbell, R. (2000). Sexist discrimination may account for well-known gender differences in psychiatric symptoms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(1), 93-99. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01025.x. google scholar
75. Koepke, S., Eyssel, F. ve Bohner, G. (2014). “She Deserved It” effects of sexism norms, type of violence, and victim’s pre-assault behavior on blame attributions toward female victims and approval of the aggressor’s behavior. Violence Against Women, 20(4), 446-464. https://doi. org/10.1177/1077801214528581. google scholar
76. Koenig, L. B., McGue, M. ve Iacono, W. G. (2008). Stability and change in religiousness during emerging adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 44, 531-543. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.44.2.532. google scholar
77. Kosterina, E., Horne, S. G. ve Lamb, S. (2019). The role of gender-based violence, health worries, and ambivalent sexism in the development of women’s gynecological symptoms. Journal of Health Psychology, 1359105318825292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318825292. google scholar
78. Kray, L. J., Thompson, L. ve Galinsky, A. (2001). Battle of the sexes: Gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 942-958. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.942. google scholar
79. Krosnick, J. A. ve Alwin, D. F. (1989). Aging and susceptibility to attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 416-425. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.416.
80. Kurzban, R., Tooby, J. ve Cosmides, L. (2001). Can race be erased? Coalitional computation and social categorization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(26), 15387-15392. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.251541498. google scholar
81. Lamb, L. M., Bigler, R. S., Liben, L. S. ve Green, V. A. (2009). Teaching children to confront peers’ sexist remarks: Implications for theories of gender development and educational practice. Sex Roles, 61(6), 361-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9634-4. google scholar
82. Lamont, R. A., Swift, H. J. ve Abrams, D. (2015). A review and meta-analysis of age-based stereotype threat: Negative stereotypes, not facts, do the damage. Psychology and Aging, 30(1), 180-193. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038586.
83. Lenton, A. P., Bruder, M. ve Sedikides, C. (2009). A meta-analysis on the malleability of automatic gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33(2), 183196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01488.x. google scholar
84. Liben, L. S. ve Coyle, E. F. (2014). Developmental interventions to address the STEM gender gap: Exploring intended and unintended consequences. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 47, 77-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2014.06.001. google scholar
85. Lundeberg, M. A. (1997). You guys are overreacting: Teaching prospective teachers about subtle gender bias. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 55-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487197048001008. google scholar
86. Maccoby, E. E. ve Jacklin, C. N. (1974). Myth, reality and shades of gray-what we know and don’t know about sex differences. Psychology Today, 8(7), 109-112. doi:10. 1037/e400662009-008. google scholar
87. McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. J. F. Dovidio ve S. L. Gaertner (Ed.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism içinde (s. 91- 125). Academic Press. google scholar
88. McConnell, A. R. ve Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the Implicit Association Test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(5), 435-442. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1470. google scholar
89. McKimmie, B. M., Masters, J. M., Masser, B. M., Schuller, R. A. ve Terry, D. J. (2013). Stereotypical and counterstereotypical defendants: Who is he and what was the case against her?. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19(3), 343-354. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030505. google scholar
90. Mehl, M. R., Vazire, S., Ramnez-Esparza, N., Slatcher, R. B. ve Pennebaker, J. W. (2007). Are women really more talkative than men?. Science, 317(5834), 82-82. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1139940. google scholar
91. Meyer, E. J. (2008). Gendered harassment in secondary schools: Understanding teachers’(non) interventions. Gender and Education, 20(6), 555-570. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250802213115. google scholar
92. Monteith, M. J. (1993). Self-regulation of prejudiced responses: Implications for progress in prejudice-reduction efforts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(3), 469-485. google scholar
93. Mora, N. (2006). Kitle iletişim araçlarında yeniden üretilen cinsiyetçilik ve toplumda yansıması. Journal of Human Sciences, 2(1), 1-7. google scholar
94. Moss-Racusin, C. A., van der Toorn, J., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J. ve 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. google scholar
95. Navarro-Perez, J. J., Oliver, A., Carbonell, Â. ve Schneider, B. H. (2020). Effectiveness of a mobile app intervention to prevent dating violence in residential child care. Psychosocial Intervention, 29(2), 59-66. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2020a3. google scholar
96. Newall, C., Gonsalkorale, K., Walker, E., Forbes, G. A., Highfield, K. ve Sweller, N. (2018). Science education: Adult biases because of the child’s gender and gender stereotypicality. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 55, 30-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.08.003. google scholar
97. Nosek, B. A. (2005). Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 134(4), 565-584. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.4.565. google scholar
98. Owen, J., Tao, K. ve Rodolfa, E. (2010). Microaggressions and women in short-term psychotherapy: Initial evidence. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(7), 923-946. https://doi. org/10.1177/0011000010376093. google scholar
99. Parker, L. R., Monteith, M. J., Moss-Racusin, C. A. ve Van Camp, A. R. (2018). Promoting concern about gender bias with evidence-based confrontation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 8-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.009. google scholar
100. Perugini, M. (2005). Predictive models of implicit and explicit attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(1), 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604X23491. google scholar
101. Proverbio, A. M., Alberio, A. ve De Benedetto, F. (2018). Neural correlates of automatic beliefs about gender stereotypes: Males are more prejudicial. Brain and Language, 186, 8-16. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.bandl.2018.08.006. google scholar
102. Proverbio, A. M., Orlandi, A. ve Bianchi, E. (2017). Electrophysiological markers of prejudice related to sexual gender. Neuroscience, 358, 1-12. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.06.028. google scholar
103. Ramos, M. R., Barreto, M., Ellemers, N., Moya, M., Ferreira, L. ve Calanchini, J. (2016). Exposure to sexism can decrease implicit gender stereotype bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(4), 455-466. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2165. google scholar
104. Rinehart, J. W. (1963). The meaning of stereotypes. Theory into Practice, 2(3), 136-143. google scholar
105. Rosenthal, G. G. (2017). Mate choice: The evolution of sexual decision making from microbes to humans. Princeton University Press. google scholar
106. Rudman, L. A. ve Glick, P. (2008). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. Guilford Press. google scholar
107. Sagone, E., De Caroli, M. E., Coco, R. F. M. ve Perciavalle, V. (2018). Flexibility of gender stereotypes: Italian study on comparative gender-consistent and gender-inconsistent information. Educational Psychology, 24(2), 93-98. https://doi.org/10.5093/psed2018a14. google scholar
108. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2002). Çelişik Duygulu Cinsiyetçilik ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17(49), 47-58. google scholar
109. Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2003). Cinsiyetçilik: Kadınlara ve erkeklere ilişkin tutumlar ve çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik kuramı. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 6(12), 1-20. google scholar
110. Schneider, D. J. (2005). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press. google scholar
111. Shields, S. A., Zawadzki, M. J. ve Johnson, R. N. (2011). The impact of the Workshop Activity for Gender Equity Simulation in the Academy (WAGES-Academic) in demonstrating cumulative effects of gender bias. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(2), 120-129. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0022953. google scholar
112. Sidanius, J. (1993). The interface between racism and sexism. The Journal of Psychology, 127(3), 311322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1993.9915565. google scholar
113. Skowronski, J. J. ve Lawrence, M. A. (2001). A comparative study of the implicit and explicit gender attitudes of children and college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25(2), 155-165. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00017. google scholar
114. Soylu, N. S. (2017). Spontane kişilik özelliği çıkarımları ve cinsiyet stereotipleri (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Ege Üniversitesi: İzmir. google scholar
115. Spence, J. T. ve Hahn, E. D. (1997). The attitudes toward women scale and attitude change in college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 17-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997. tb00098.x. google scholar
116. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L. ve Stapp, J. (1974). The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A measure of sex role stereotypes and masculinity-femininity. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 43-44. google scholar
117. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. ve Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of personality and social psychology, 32, 29-39. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076857. google scholar
118. Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
119. Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S. ve Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 199-214. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199. google scholar
120. Swim, J. K. ve Campbell, B. (2003). Sexism: Attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. R. Brown ve S. Gaertner, (Ed.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes içinde (ss. 218237). Blackwell Publishing. google scholar
121. Swim, J. K., Hyers, L.L., Cohen, L. L. ve Ferguson, M. J. (2001). Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 31-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798402239228. google scholar
122. Taub, N. (1985). Dealing with employment discrimination and damaging stereotypes: A legal perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 41(4), 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985. tb01144.x. google scholar
123. Tinkler, J. E., Li, Y. E., ve Mollborn, S. (2007). Can legal interventions change beliefs? The effect of exposure to sexual harassment policy on men’s gender beliefs. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70(4), 480-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250707000413. google scholar
124. Todorov, A. ve Uleman, J. S. (2003). The efficiency of binding spontaneous trait inferences to actors’ faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 549-562. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00059-3. google scholar
125. Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M. ve 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. google scholar
126. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK, 2019). Toplumsal yapi ve cinsiyet istatistikleri. Erişim adresi: https:// data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Nufus-ve-Demografi-109 google scholar
127. Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36(5-6), 305-325. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766650. google scholar
128. Uleman, J. S., Saribay, S. A. ve Gonzalez, C. M. (2008). Spontaneous inferences, implicit impressions, and implicit theories. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 329-360. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. psych.59.103006.093707. google scholar
129. Üstünel, A. O. (2020). A feminist approach to dating violence prevention: Creating change towards safety, equality and mutuality. Feminism & Psychology, 30(2), 143-164. https://doi. org/10.1177/0959353519882462. google scholar
130. Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S. ve Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107(1), 101-126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.1.101. google scholar
131. Winter, L. ve Uleman, J. S. (1984). When are social judgments made? Evidence for the spontaneousness of trait inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(2), 237-252. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.2.237. google scholar
132. Yan, X., Wang, M. ve Zhang, Q. (2012). Effects of gender stereotypes on spontaneous trait inferences and the moderating role of gender schematicity: Evidence from Chinese undergraduates. Social Cognition, 30(2), 220-231. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2012.30.2.220. google scholar
133. Yüksel-Kaptanoğlu, İ., Arslan, H. ve Akyıldırım, O. (2021). Toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliğine duyarlı veri ve göstergeler. Cinsiyet Eşitliği İzleme Derneği Yayınları. Erişim adresi: https://dspace.ceid. org.tr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/1415/E%C4%9Fitim%20Materyali%20-%20Veri%20ve%20 G%C3%B6stergeler%20SON.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y google scholar
134. Zarate, M. A., Uleman, J. S. ve Voils, C. I. (2001). Effects of culture and processing goals on the activation and binding of trait concepts. Social Cognition, 19(3), 295-323. https://doi.org/10.1521/ soco.19.3.295.21469. google scholar