My Eyes Are Up Here: The Nature of the Objectifying Gaze Toward Women

Sex Roles

Volumn 69, Issue 11-12, 2013, Pages 557-570

  Gervais, Sarah J ^a   Holland, Arianne M ^a   Dodd, Michael D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Attractiveness; Dehumanization; Eye tracking; Impression formation; Male gaze; Objectifying gaze; Person perception; Sexual objectification

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888060034     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-013-0316-x     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D. D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 725-735. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 45. 4. 725.
2. Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.
3. Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Funder, D. C. (2007). Psychology as the science of self-reports and finger movements: What happened to actual behavior? Psychological Science, 2, 396-403. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-6916. 2007. 00051. x.
4. Bernard, P., Gervais, S. J., Allen, J., Campomizzi, S., & Klein, O. (2012). Integrating sexual objectification with object versus person recognition: The sexualized body-inversion hypothesis. Psychological Science, 23, 469-471. doi: 10. 1177/0956797611434748.
5. Bodenhausen, G. V., & Macrae, C. (1998). Stereotype activation and inhibition. In R. R. Wyer & R. R. Wyer (Eds.), Stereotype activation and inhibition (pp. 1-52). Mahwah, NJ US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
6. Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In T. K. Srull & R. R. Wyer (Eds.), A dual process model of impression formation (pp. 1-36). Hillsdale, NJ England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
7. Calogero, R. M. (2004). A test of objectification theory: The effect of the male gaze on appearance concerns in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 16-21. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1471-6402. 2004. 00118.
8. Cikara, M., Eberhardt, J. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2011). From agents to objects: Sexist attitudes and neural responses to sexualized targets. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 540-551. doi: 10. 1162/jocn. 2010. 21497.
9. Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. New York: Psychology Press.
10. Davidson, M. M., Gervais, S. J., Canivez, G. L., & Cole, B. P. (2013). A psychometric examination of the interpersonal sexual objectification scale among college men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 239-250. doi: 10. 1037/a0032075.
11. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290. doi: 10. 1037/h0033731.
12. Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2010). Watching the hourglass: Eye tracking reveals men's appreciation of the female form. Human Nature, 21, 355-370. doi: 10. 1007/s12110-010-9100-6.
13. Dixson, B. J., Grimshaw, G. M., Linklater, W. L., & Dixson, A. F. (2011). Eye tracking of men's preferences for waist-to-hip ratio and breast size of women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 43-50. doi: 10. 1007/s10508-009-9523-5.
14. Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 110. 1. 109.
15. Ekman, P. (1993). Facial expression and emotion. American Psychologist, 48, 384-392. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 48. 4. 384.
16. Engeln-Maddox, R., Miller, S. A., & Doyle, D. M. (2011). Tests of objectification theory in gay and lesbian samples: Mixed evidence for proposed pathways. Sex Roles, 65, 518-532. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-011-9958-8.
17. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1-74). New York: Academic.
18. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173-206. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1471-6402. 1997. tb00108.
19. Gervais, S. J., Bernard, P., Klein, O., & Allen, J. (2013a). Toward a unified theory of objectification and dehumanization. In S. J. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (De)Humanization (pp. 1-24). New York, NY: Springer.
20. Gervais, S. J., DiLillo, D., & McChargue, D. (2013b). Understanding the link between men's alcohol use and sexual violence: The mediating role of sexual objectification. Psychology of Violence. doi: 10. 1037/a0033840
21. Gervais, S. J., Vescio, T. K., & Allen, J. (2011). When what you see is what you get: The consequences of the objectifying gaze for men and women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 5-17. doi: 10. 1177/0361684310386121.
22. Gervais, S. J., Vescio, T. K., & Allen, J. (2012a). A test of the fungibility hypothesis from sexual objectification theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 499-513. doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8309. 2010. 02016. x.
23. Gervais, S. J., Vescio, T. K., Förster, J., Maass, A., & Suitner, C. (2012b). Seeing women as objects: The sexual body part recognition bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 743-753. doi: 10. 1002/ejsp. 1890.
24. Gueguen, N. (2007). Women's bust size and men's courtship solicitation. Body Image, 4, 386-390. doi: 10. 1016/j. bodyim. 2007. 06. 006.
25. Hall, J. A., Coats, E. J., & Smith LeBeau, L. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 898-924. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 131. 6. 898.
26. Heflick, N. A., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2009). Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence that objectification causes women to be perceived as less competent and less fully human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 598-601. doi: 10. 1016/j. jesp. 2009. 02. 008.
27. Heflick, N. A., Goldenberg, J. L., Cooper, D. P., & Puvia, E. (2011). From women to objects: Appearance focus, target gender, and perceptions of warmth, morality and competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 572-581. doi: 10. 1016/j. jesp. 2010. 12. 020.
28. Heflick, N. A., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2011). Sarah Palin, a nation object(ifie)s: The role of appearance focus in the 2008 U. S. presidential election. Sex Roles, 65, 149-155. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-010-9901-41.
29. Heilman, M. E., & Stopeck, M. H. (1985). Being attractive, advantage or disadvantage? Performance-based evaluations and recommended personnel actions as a function of appearance, sex, and job type. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 202-215. doi: 10. 1016/0749-5978(85)90035-4.
30. Henderson, J. M. (2003). Human gaze control during real-world scene perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 498-504. doi: 10. 1016/j. tics. 2003. 09. 006.
31. Henderson, J. M., Williams, C. C., Castelhano, M. S., & Falk, R. J. (2003). Eye movements and picture processing during recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 725-734. doi: 10. 3758/BF03194809.
32. Henley, N. (1977). Body politics: Power, sex, and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
33. Hewig, J., Trippe, R. H., Hecht, H., Straube, T., & Miltner, W. R. (2008). Gender differences for specific body regions when looking at men and women. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 67-78. doi: 10. 1007/s10919-007-0043-5.
34. Holland, E., & Haslam, N. (2013). Worth the weight: The objectification of overweight versus thin targets. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi: 10. 1177/0361684312474800.
35. Johnson, V., & Gurung, R. R. (2011). Defusing the objectification of women by other women: The role of competence. Sex Roles, 65, 177-188. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-011-0006-5.
36. Johnson, K. L., Lurye, L. E., & Tassinary, L. G. (2010). Sex categorization among preschool children: Increasing utilization of sexually dimorphic cues. Child Development, 81, 1346-1355. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-8624. 2010. 01476.
37. Johnson, K. L., & Tassinary, L. G. (2005). Perceiving sex directly and indirectly: Meaning in motion and morphology. Psychological Science, 16, 890-897. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-9280. 2005. 01633.
38. Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women's experience. New York: Basic Books.
39. Kilbourne, J., & Pipher, M. (1999). Deadly persuasion: Why women and girls must fight the addictive power of advertising. New York: Free Press.
40. Kozee, H. B., Tylka, T. L., Augustus-Horvath, C. L., & Denchik, A. (2007). Development and psychometric evaluation of the interpersonal sexual objectification scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 176-189. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1471-6402. 2007. 00351.
41. Lindner, D., Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Jentsch, F. (2012). Social comparison and the 'circle of objectification'. Sex Roles, 67, 222-235. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-012-0175-x.
42. Lippa, R. (1983). Sex typing and the perception of body outlines. Journal of Personality, 51, 667-682. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 1983. tb00873.
43. Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., Murnane, T., Vaes, J., Reynolds, C., & Suitner, C. (2010). Objectification leads to depersonalization: The denial of mind and moral concern to objectified others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 709-717. doi: 10. 1002/ejsp. 755.
44. Loughnan, S., Fernandez, S., Vaes, J., Anjum, G., Aziz, M., Harada, C.,Tsuchiya, K. (2013). Sexual objectification is common in Western, but not non-Western nations: A seven nation study of sexual objectification. Manuscript submitted for publication.
45. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97. doi: 10. 1037/h0043158.
46. Moradi, B., & Huang, Y. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 377-398. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1471-6402. 2008. 00452.
47. Morton, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition. Psychological Review, 98, 164-181. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 98. 2. 164.
48. Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Screen, 16, 6-18.
49. Pope, H., Katz, D., & Hudson, J. (1993). Anorexia nervosa and "reverse anorexia" among 108 male bodybuilders. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 34, 406-409. doi: 10. 1016/0010-440X(93)90066-D.
50. Puvia, E., & Vaes, J. (2012). Being a body: Women's appearance related self-views and their dehumanization of sexually objectified female targets. Sex Roles, 68, 484-495. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-012-0255-y.
51. Saguy, T., Quinn, D. M., Dovidio, J. F., & Pratto, F. (2010). Interacting like a body: Objectification can lead women to narrow their presence in social interactions. Psychological Science, 21, 178-182. doi: 10. 1177/0956797609357751.
52. Stangor, C., Lynch, L., Duan, C., & Glass, B. (1992). Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 207-218. doi: 10. 1037/0022-3514. 62. 2. 207.
53. Strelan, P., & Hargreaves, D. (2005). Women who objectify other women: The vicious circle of objectification? Sex Roles, 52, 707-712. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-005-3737-3.
54. Vaes, J., & Latrofa, M. (under review). From ogling to dehumanization: The objectifying gaze.
55. Vaes, J., Paladino, P., & Puvia, E. (2011). Are sexualized women complete human beings? Why men and women dehumanize sexually objectified women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 774-785. doi: 10. 1002/ejsp. 824.
56. Young, I. M. (2003). Breasted experience: The look and the feeling. In R. Weitz (Ed.), The politics of women's bodies (pp. 152-163). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57. Yu, D. W., & Shepard, G. H. (1998). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature, 396, 321-322. doi: 10. 1038/24512.
58. Zelazniewicz, A. M., & Pawlowski, B. (2011). Female breast size attractiveness for men as a function of sociosexual orientation (restricted vs. unrestricted). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1129-1135.
59. Zurbriggen, E. L., Ramsey, L. R., & Jaworski, B. K. (2011). Self- and partner-objectification in romantic relationships: Associations with media consumption and relationship satisfaction. Sex Roles, 64, 449-462. doi: 10. 1007/s11199-011-9933-4.