Commentary “The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact?”

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 6, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Bernard, Philippe ^a   Gervais, Sarah J ^b   Allen, Jill ^c   Klein, Olivier ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^c MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

analytic processing; dehumanization; gender; inversion effect; sexual objectification

Indexed keywords

EID: 85019803192     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00845     Document Type: Note

References (5)

1. 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. Psychol. Sci. 23, 469–471. 10.1177/095679761143474822477107
2. Bernard P. Gervais S. J. Allen J. Delmée A. Klein O. (2015). From sex objects to human beings: Masking sexual body parts and humanization as moderators to women's objectification. Psychol. Women Q. (in press). 10.1177/0361684315580125
3. Bernard P. Gervais S. J. Allen J. Klein O. (2013). Perceptual determinants are critical, but they don't explain everything: a response to Tarr. Psychol. Sci. 24, 1071–1073. 10.1177/095679761247467223599306
4. Kostic B. (2013). Replication of Sexualized Body Inversion Effects. Available online at: http://www.PsychFileDrawer.org/replication.php?attempt=MTcw
5. Schmidt A. F. Kistemaker L. M. (2015). The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis revisited: Valid indicator of sexual objectification or methodological artifact? Cognition 134, 77-84. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.09.00325460381