Self-Subjugation Among Women: Exposure to Sexist Ideology, Self-Objectification, and the Protective Function of the Need to Avoid Closure

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 100, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 211-228

  Calogero, Rachel M ^a,b   Jost, John T ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

^b VIRGINIA WESLEYAN COLLEGE   (United States)

^c NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Benevolent sexism; Complementary stereotypes; Need for cognitive closure; Self objectification; System justification

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; BODY IMAGE; COGNITION; FEMALE; GENDER IDENTITY; HUMAN; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF CONCEPT; SEX DIFFERENCE; SHAME; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; BODY IMAGE; COGNITION; CUES; FEMALE; GENDER IDENTITY; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; PREJUDICE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SELF CONCEPT; SEX FACTORS; SHAME; STEREOTYPING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79951572151     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0021864     Document Type: Article

References (142)

1. Abrams D., Viki G.T., Masser B., Bohner G. Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 84:111-125. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.111.
2. Adams G., Garcia D.M., Purdie-Vaughns V., Steele C.M. The detrimental effects of a suggestion of sexism in an instruction situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2006, 42:602-615. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.10.004.
3. Aiken L.S., West S.G. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions 1991, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
4. Allport G. The nature of prejudice 1954, Addison Wesley, Cambridge, MA.
5. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
6. Barreto M., Ellemers N. The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology 2005, 35:633-642. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.270.
7. Bartky S. Femininity and domination 1990, Routledge, New York, NY.
8. Bem S.L., Bem D.J. Case study of a nonconscious ideology: Training the woman to know her place. Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs 1970, 89-99. Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA. D.J. Bem (Ed.).
9. Bem S.L., Lenney E. Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1976, 33:48-54. doi: 10.1037/h0078640.
10. Berger J. Ways of seeing 1972, Penguin, London, England.
11. Breines J.G., Crocker J., Garcia J.A. Self-objectification and well-being in women's daily lives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2008, 34:583-598. doi: 10.1177/0146167207313727.
12. Calogero R.M. A test of objectification theory: Effect of the male gaze on appearance concerns in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2004, 28:16-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00118.x.
13. Calogero R.M. Objectification processes and disordered eating in British women and men. Journal of Health Psychology 2009, 14:394-402. doi: 10.1177/1359105309102192.
14. Calogero R.M. Operationalizing self-objectification: Assessment and related methodological issues. Self-objectification in women: Causes, consequences, and counteractions 2010, 23-49. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. R. Calogero, S. Tantleff-Dunn, J.K. Thompson (Eds.).
15. Calogero R.M., Bardi A., Sutton R.M. Needing values: Associations between the need for cognitive closure and people's value priorities. Personality and Individual Differences 2009, 46:154-159. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.019.
16. Calogero R.M., Davis W.N., Thompson J.K. The role of self-objectification in the experience of women with eating disorders. Sex Roles 2005, 52:43-50. doi: 10.1007/s11199-005-1192-9.
17. Calogero R.M., Herbozo S., Thompson J.K. Complementary weightism: The potential costs of appearance-related commentary for women's self-objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2009, 33:120-132. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.01479.x.
18. Calogero R.M., Pina A., Park L.E., Rahemtulla Z. Objectification theory predicts college women's attitudes toward cosmetic surgery. Sex Roles 2010, 63:32-41. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9759-5.
19. Calogero R.M., Tantleff-Dunn S., Thompson J.K. Self-objectification in women: Causes, consequences, and directions for research and practice 2010, American Psychological Association, Washington, D. C.
20. Calogero R.M., Thompson J.K. Potential implications of the objectification of women's bodies for women's sexual satisfaction. Body Image 2009, 6:145-148. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.01.001.
21. Calogero R.M., Watson N. Self-discrepancy and chronic social self-consciousness: Unique and interactive effects of gender and real-ought discrepancy. Personality and Individual Differences 2009, 46:642-647. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.008.
22. Cikara M., Lee T.L., Fiske S.T., Glick P. Ambivalent sexism at home and at work: How attitudes toward women in relationships foster exclusion in the public sphere. Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification 2009, 444-462. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. J.T. Jost, A.C. Kay, H. Thorisdottir (Eds.).
23. Cooley C.H. On social psychology 1964, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, (Original work published 1902).
24. Dardenne B., Dumont M., Bollier T. Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women's performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007, 93:764-779. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764.
25. Davies P.G., Spencer S.J., Quinn D.M., Gerhardstein R. Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2002, 28:1615-1628. doi: 10.1177/014616702237644.
26. Davis S. Men as success objects and women as sex objects: A study of personal advertisements. Sex Roles 1990, 23:43-50. doi: 10.1007/BF00289878.
27. Deaux K., Major B. Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review 1987, 94:369-389. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369.
28. De Beauvoir, S. (1952). The second sex (H. M. Parshley, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage Books.
29. De Grada E., Kruglanski A.W., Mannetti L., Pierro A. Motivated cognition and group interaction: Need for closure affects the contents and processes of collective negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1999, 35:346-365. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1999.1376.
30. Dellinger K., Williams C.L. Makeup at work: Negotiating appearance rules in the workplace. Gender & Society 1997, 11:151-177. doi: 10.1177/089124397011002002.
31. Dijksterhuis A., van Knippenberg A., Kruglanski A.W., Schaper C. Motivated social cognition: Need for closure effects on memory and judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1996, 32:254-270. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1996.0012.
32. Dion K.K., Berscheid E., Walster E. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1972, 24:285-290. doi: 10.1037/h0033731.
33. Dion K.L., Dion K.K., Keelan P. Appearance anxiety as a dimension of social-evaluative anxiety: Exploring the ugly duckling syndrome. Contemporary Social Psychology 1990, 14:220-224.
34. Doherty K. A mind of her own: Effects of need for cognitive closure and gender on reactions to nonconformity. Sex Roles 1998, 38:801-819. doi: 10.1023/A:1018825231362.
35. Duval S., Wicklund R.A. A theory of objective self-awareness 1972, Academic Press, New York, NY.
36. Eagly A.H. Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation 1987, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
37. Eagly A.H., Ashmore R.D., Makhijani M.G., Longo L.C. What is beautiful is good, but... A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin 1991, 110:109-128. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109.
38. Eagly A.H., Mladinic A., Otto S. Are women evaluated more favorably than men? An analysis of attitudes, beliefs, and emotions. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1991, 15:203-216. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00792.x.
39. Eagly A.H., Steffen V.J. Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1984, 46:735-754. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735.
40. Eagly A.H., Wood W., Johannesen-Schmidt M.C. Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: Implications for the partner preferences of women and men. The psychology of gender 2004, 269-295. Guilford Press, New York, NY. A.H. Eagly, A.E. Beall, R.J. Sternberg (Eds.).
41. Engeln-Maddox R. Buying a beauty standard or dreaming of a new life? Expectations associated with media ideals. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2006, 30:258-266. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00294.x.
42. Evans P.C. 'If only I were thin like her, maybe I could be happy like her': The self-implications of associating a thin female ideal with life success. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2003, 27:209-214. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00100.
43. Fairchild K., Rudman L.A. Everyday stranger harassment and women's objectification. Social Justice Research 2008, 21:338-357. doi: 10.1007/s11211-008-0073-0.
44. Fenigstein A., Scheier M.F., Buss A.H. Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1975, 43:522-527. doi: 10.1037/h0076760.
45. Fiske S.T., Bersoff D.N., Borgida E., Deaux K., Heilman M.E. Social science research on trial: Use of sex stereotyping research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. American Psychologist 1991, 46:1049-1060. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.46.10.1049.
46. Forbes G.B., Collinsworth L.L., Jobe R.L., Braun K.D., Wise L.M. Sexism, hostility toward women, and endorsement of beauty ideals and practices: Are beauty ideals associated with oppressive beliefs?. Sex Roles 2007, 56:265-273. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9161-5.
47. Forbes G.B., Doroszewicz K., Card K., Adams-Curtis L. Association of the thin body ideal, ambivalent sexism, and self-esteem with body acceptance and the preferred body size of college women in Poland and the United States. Sex Roles 2004, 50:331-345. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000018889.14714.20.
48. Ford T.E., Kruglanski A.W. Effects of epistemic motivations on the use of accessible constructs in social judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1995, 21:950-962. doi: 10.1177/0146167295219009.
49. Franzoi S.L. Is female body esteem shaped by benevolent sexism?. Sex Roles 2001, 44:177-188. doi: 10.1023/A:1010903003521.
50. Fredrickson B.L., Roberts T. Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1997, 21:173-206. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x.
51. Fredrickson B.L., Roberts T.A., Noll S.M., Quinn D.M., Twenge J.M. That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1998, 75:269-284. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.269.
52. Fu J.H., Morris M.W., Lee S., Chao M., Chiu C., Hong Y. Epistemic motives and cultural conformity: Need for closure, culture, and context as determinants of conflict judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007, 92:191-207. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.191.
53. Galinsky A.D., Magee J.C., Inesi M.E., Gruenfeld D.H. Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science 2006, 17:1068-1074. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01824.x.
54. Gapinski K.D., Brownell K.D., LaFrance M. Body objectification and " fat talk": Effects on emotion, motivation, and cognitive performance. Sex Roles 2003, 48:377-388. doi: 10.1023/A:1023516209973.
55. Gibbons F.X. Self-attention and behavior: A review and theoretical update. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1990, 23:249-303. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60321-4.
56. Glick P., Diebold J., Bailey-Werner B., Zhu L. The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1997, 23:1323-1334. doi: 10.1177/01461672972312009.
57. Glick P., Fiske S.T. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1996, 70:491-512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
58. Glick P., Fiske S.T. An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist 2001, 56:109-118. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.
59. Glick P., Lameiras M., Fiske S.T., Eckes T., Masser B., Volpato C., Wells R. Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2004, 86:713-728. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.713.
60. Glick P., Sakalli-Ugurlu N., Ferreira M.C., Souza M.A. Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2002, 26:292-297. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00068.
61. Grabe S., Hyde J.S., Lindberg S.M. Body objectification and depression in adolescents: The role of gender, shame, and rumination. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2007, 31:164-175. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00350.x.
62. Gruenfeld D.H., Inesi M.E., Magee J.C., Galinsky A.D. Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2008, 95:111-127. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.111.
63. Hargreaves D.A., Tiggemann M. " Body image is for girls": A qualitative study of boys' body image. Journal of Health Psychology 2006, 11:567-576. doi: 10.1177/1359105306065017.
64. Harper B., Tiggemann M. The effect of thin ideal images on women's self-objectification, mood, and body image. Sex Roles 2008, 58:649-657. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9379-x.
65. Higgins E.T., Rholes W.S., Jones C.R. Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1977, 13:141-154. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3.
66. Hill M.S., Fischer A.R. Examining objectification theory: Lesbian and heterosexual women's experiences with sexual and self-objectification. The Counseling Psychologist 2008, 36:745-776. doi: 10.1177/0011000007301669.
67. Hoffman C., Hurst N. Gender stereotypes: Perception or rationalization?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1990, 58:197-208. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.58.2.197.
68. Holmbeck G.N. Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1997, 65:599-610. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.65.4.599.
69. Jackman M.R. The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations 1994, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
70. James W. The principles of psychology 1981, 1. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, (Original work published 1890).
71. Jost J.T. Negative illusions: Conceptual clarification and psychological evidence concerning false consciousness. Political Psychology 1995, 16:397-424. doi: 10.2307/3791837.
72. Jost J.T. An experimental replication of the depressed entitlement effect among women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1997, 21:387-393. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00120.x.
73. Jost J.T., Banaji M. The role stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology 1994, 33:1-27.
74. Jost J.T., Banaji M., Nosek B.A. A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and nonconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology 2004, 25:881-919. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x.
75. Jost J.T., Glaser J., Kruglanski A.W., Sulloway F. Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin 2003, 129:339-375. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339.
76. Jost J.T., Hamilton D.L. Stereotypes in our culture. On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport 2005, 208-224. Blackwell, Oxford, England. J. Dovidio, P. Glick, L. Rudman (Eds.).
77. Jost J.T., Hunyady O. The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology 2002, 13:111-153.
78. Jost J.T., Hunyady O. Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2005, 14:260-265. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x.
79. Jost J.T., Kay A. Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2005, 88:498-509. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498.
80. Jost J.T., Kruglanski A.W., Simon L. Effects of epistemic motivation on conservatism, intolerance, and other system-justifying attitudes. Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge 1999, 91-116. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. L.L. Thompson, J.M. Levine, D.M. Messick (Eds.).
81. Jost J.T., Nosek B.A., Gosling S.D. Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2008, 3:126-136. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00070.x.
82. Jost J.T., Pelham B.W., Caravallo M. Non-conscious forms of system-justification: Cognitive, affective, and behavioural preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2002, 38:586-602. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00505-X.
83. Kaschak E. Engendered lives: A new psychology of women's experience 1992, Basic Books, New York, NY.
84. Kay A.C., Gaucher D., Napier J.L., Callan M.J., Laurin K. God and the government: Testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2008, 95:18-35. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18.
85. Kay A.C., Jost J.T. Complementary justice: Effects of " poor but happy" and " poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 85:823-837. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823.
86. Kay A.C., Jost J.T., Mandisodza A.N., Sherman S.J., Petrocelli J.V., Johnson A.L. Panglossian ideology in the service of system justification: How complementary stereotypes help us to rationalize inequality. Advances in experimental social psychology 2007, 39:305-358. Elsevier, San Diego, CA. M. Zanna (Ed.).
87. Kilianski S.E., Rudman L.A. Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism?. Sex Roles 1998, 39:333-352. doi: 10.1023/A:1018814924402.
88. Kling K.C., Hyde J.S., Showers C.J., Buswell B.N. Gender differences in self-esteem: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 1999, 125:470-500. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.4.470.
89. Kossowska M. Motivation towards closure and cognitive processes: An individual differences approach. Personality and Individual Differences 2007, 43:2149-2158. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2007.06.027.
90. Kozee H.B., Tylka T.L., Augustus-Horvath C.L., Denchik A. Development and psychometric evaluation of the interpersonal sexual objectification scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2007, 31:176-189. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00351.x.
91. Kruglanski A.W. Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases 1989, Plenum Press, New York, NY.
92. Kruglanski A.W. The psychology of closed-mindedness 2006, Psychology Press, New York, NY.
93. Kruglanski A.W., Webster D.M. Motivated closing of the mind: " Seizing" and " freezing." Psychological Review 1996, 103:263-283. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.103.2.263.
94. Lane J.D., Wegner D.M. The cognitive consequences of secrecy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1995, 69:237-253. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.237.
95. Lau G.P., Kay A.C., Spencer S.J. Loving those who justify inequality: The effects of system threat on attraction to women who embody benevolent sexist ideals. Psychological Science 2008, 19:20-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02040.x.
96. Loya B.N., Cowan G., Walters C. The role of social comparison and body consciousness in women's hostility toward women. Sex Roles 2006, 54:575-583. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9024-0.
97. MacKinnon D.P., Lockwood C.M., Williams J. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2004, 39:99-128. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4.
98. Major B., Spencer S., Schmader T., Wolfe C., Crocker J. Coping with negative stereotypes about intellectual performance: The role of psychological disengagement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1998, 24:34-50. doi: 10.1177/0146167298241003.
99. Mannetti L., Pierro A., Kruglanski A.W. Who regrets more after choosing a non-status-quo option? Post-decisional regret under need for cognitive closure. Journal of Economic Psychology 2007, 28:186-196. doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2005.12.004.
100. McCreary D.R. The male role and avoiding femininity. Sex Roles 1994, 31:517-531. doi: 10.1007/BF01544277.
101. McKinley N.M., Hyde J.S. The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale: Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1996, 20:181-215. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00467.x.
102. Mead G.H. Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist 1934, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
103. Mercurio A.E., Landry L.J. Self-objectification and well-being: The impact of self-objectification on women's overall sense of self-worth and life satisfaction. Sex Roles 2008, 58:458-466. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9357-3.
104. Mishkind M.E., Rodin J., Silberstein L.R., Striegel-Moore R.H. The embodiment of masculinity: Cultural, psychological, and behavioral dimensions. American Behavioral Scientist 1986, 29:545-562. doi: 10.1177/000276486029005004.
105. Moradi B., Huang Y.-P. Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2008, 32:377-398. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00452.x.
106. Muehlenkamp J.J., Swanson J.D., Brausch A.M. Self-objectification, risk taking, and self-harm in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2005, 29:24-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00164.x.
107. Napier J.L., Thorisdottir H., Jost J.T. The joy of sexism? A multinational investigation of hostile and benevolent justifications for gender inequality and their relation to subjective well-being. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research 2010, 62:405-419. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9712-7.
108. Noll S.M., Fredrickson B.L. A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame, and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1998, 22:623-636. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00181.x.
109. Nosek B.A., Banaji M.R., Greenwald A.G. Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002, 83:44-59. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44.
110. Pek J.C.X., Leong F.T.L. Sex-related self-concepts, cognitive styles and cultural values of traditionality-modernity as predictors of general and domain-specific sexism. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 2003, 6:31-49. doi: 10.1111/1467-839X.t01-1-00008.
111. Pratto F., Walker A. The bases of gendered power. The psychology of gender 2004, 242-268. Guilford Press, New York, NY. A.H. Eagly, A.E. Beall, R.J. Sternberg (Eds.).
112. Prentice D.A., Carranza E. What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2002, 26:269-281. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066.
113. Pryor J.B., Geidd J.L., Williams K.B. A social-psychological model for predicting sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues 1995, 51:69-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01309.x.
114. Puwar N. Thinking about making a difference. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 2004, 6:65-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2004.00127.x.
115. Quinn D.M., Kallen R.W., Cathey C. Body on my mind: The lingering effect of state self-objectification. Sex Roles 2006, 55:869-874. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9140-x.
116. Quinn D.M., Kallen R.W., Twenge J.M., Fredrickson B.L. The disruptive effect of self-objectification on performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2006, 30:59-64.
117. Roberts T., Gettman J.Y. Mere exposure: Gender differences in the negative effects of priming a state of self-objectification. Sex Roles 2004, 51:17-27.
118. Roets A., van Heil A. Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the need for closure scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2007, 33:266-280. doi: 10.1177/0146167206294744.
119. Rosenberg M. Conceiving the self 1986, Krieger, Malabar, FL.
120. Saroglou V., Dupuis J. Being Buddhist in Western Europe: Cognitive needs, prosocial character, and values. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 2006, 16:163-179. doi: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr1603_2.
121. Schmader T., Johns M. Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 85:440-452. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440.
122. Selig J.P., Preacher K.J. Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Software] 2008, June, Retrieved from http://www.people.ku.edu/~preacher/medmc/medmc.htm.
123. Sibley C.G., Overall N.C., Duckitt J. When women become more hostilely sexist toward their gender: The system-justifying effect of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles 2007, 57:743-754. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9306-1.
124. Stapel, D. A., & Noordewier, M. K. (in press). The mental roots of system justification: System threat, need for structure, and stereotyping. Social Cognition.
125. Steele C.M. A threat is in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist 1997, 52:613-629. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613.
126. Steele C.M., Aronson J. Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1995, 69:797-811. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797.
127. Steer A., Tiggemann M. The role of self-objectification in women's sexual functioning. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 2008, 27:205-225. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2008.27.3.205.
128. Swim J.K., Hyers L.L., Cohen L.L., Ferguson M.J. Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues 2001, 57:31-53. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00200.
129. Tiggemann M., Boundy M. Effect of environment and appearance compliment on college women's self-objectification, mood, body shame, and cognitive performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2008, 32:399-405. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00453.x.
130. Tiggemann M., Kuring J.K. The role of body objectification in disordered eating and depressed mood. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 2004, 43:299-311. doi: 10.1348/0144665031752925.
131. Tiggemann M., Rothblum E.D. Gender differences in internal beliefs about weight and negative attitudes towards self and others. Psychology of Women Quarterly 1997, 21:581-593. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00132.x.
132. Tiggemann M., Slater A. A test of objectification theory in former dancers and non-dancers. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2001, 25:57-64. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00007.
133. Tylka T.L., Hill M.S. Objectification theory as it relates to disordered eating among college women. Sex Roles 2004, 51:719-730. doi: 10.1007/s11199-004-0721-2.
134. Unger R.K. Toward a redefinition of sex and gender. American Psychologist 1979, 34:1085-1094. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.11.1085.
135. Vandello J.A., Bosson J.K., Cohen D., Burnaford R.M., Weaver J.R. Precarious manhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2008, 95:1325-1339. doi: 10.1037/a0012453.
136. Van der Toorn, J., Feinberg, M., Jost, J. T., Kay, A. C., Tyler, T. R., Willer, R., & Wilmuth, C. (2010). Powerlessness increases system justification: Implications for the legitimation of inequality and authority. Manuscript submitted for publication.
137. Van Hiel A., Pandelaere M., Duriez B. The impact of need for closure on conservative beliefs and racism: Differential mediation by authoritarian submission and authoritarian dominance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2004, 30:824-837. doi: 10.1177/0146167204264333.
138. Viki G.T., Abrams D. But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles 2002, 47:289-293. doi: 10.1023/A:1021342912248.
139. Webster D.M., Kruglanski A.W. Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1994, 67:1049-1062. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.1049.
140. Wegner D.M., Smart L. Deep cognitive activation: A new approach to the unconscious. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1997, 65:984-995. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.65.6.984.
141. Ybarra O. Naïve causal understanding of valenced behaviors and its implications for social information processing. Psychological Bulletin 2002, 128:421-441. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.421.
142. Zones J.S. Beauty myths and realities and their impacts on women's health. Gender through the prism of difference 2000, 87-103. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. 2nd ed. M.B. Zinn, P. Hondagneu-Sotelo, M. Messner (Eds.).