Abstract
The literature on prejudice toward women is reviewed and placed within an attitude-theory conceptualization. Research evidence is presented which questions the assumption of high consensuality about a single category of stereotypes of women. Unexpected results from exploratory research, intended to supplement adjective choices for the replication of traditional research on stereotypes of women, led to a reformulation of the study of stereotypes. Rather than eliciting adjectives descriptive of woman, the researchers elicited adjectives descriptive of five categories of women: housewife, bunny, clubwoman, career woman and woman athlete. Previous family theory, as well as pretesting among college students and adults in a middle-class neighborhood, generated the five categories. Undergraduate students (N=190) were then asked to separately select adjectives descriptive of each of the five categories of women; adjectives were considered stereotypical if more than 50% of the respondents check them. The results were used to question the assumption of a single category; no adjective was attributed to all five categories by both men and women. There is strong evidence for distinctive stereotypes of housewife and bunny, and, furthermore, these two traditional role alternatives for women are not perceived as complementary by the majority of respondents. A third stereotyped image of woman, a masculinized stereotype, included women's role alternatives that maintain relative independence from men.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anthony, S. B., The status of woman, past, present and future. In F. C. Griffin (ed.) Woman as revolutionary. New York: Mentor, 1973.
Bem, S. The measurement of psychological androgeny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1974, 42(2), 155–162.
Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S., Sex-role stereotypes: a current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 28(2), 59–78.
Bullough, V. L., & Bullough, B. The subordinate sex. Baltimore, Maryland: Penguin Books, Inc., 1974.
Clifton, A. K., & Fiorenzo, B. Is the affective component of prejudice toward women pervasive and highly consensual? Paper presented at the Illinois Sociological Association Meetings, Macomb, Illinois, October, 1973.
Ehrlich, H. J. The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Wiley, 1973.
Ehrlich, H. J. & Rinehart, J. W. A brief report on the methodology of stereotype research. Social Forces, 1965, 43, 564–575.
Ellis, A. The folklore of sex. New York: Grove, 1961.
Ellis, A. The American sexual tragedy (2nd ed. rev.). New York: Lyle Stuart, 1962.
Empey, L. T. Role expectations of young women regarding marriage and a career. Marriage and Family Living, 1958, 20, 152–155.
Figes, E. Patriarchal attitudes. Greenwich, Connecticut: Stein and Day, 1970.
Fishbein, M. Readings in attitude theory and measurement. New York: Wiley, 1967.
Fernberger, W. Persistence of stereotypes concerning sex differences. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1948, 43, 97–101.
Friedan, B. The feminine mystique. New York: Dell, 1963.
Gross, L. A hypothesis of feminine types in relation to family adjustment. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1950, 20, 373–381.
Gross, F. Work and society. New York: Crowell, 1958.
Haavio-Mannila, E. Sex differentiation in role expectations and performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 1967, 29(3), 568–578.
Hays, H. R. The dangerous sex. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972.
Kirkpatrick, C. The construction of a belief-pattern scale for measuring attitudes toward feminism. Journal of Social Psychology, 1936, 7, 421–437. (a)
Kirkpatrick, C. Content of a scale for measuring attitudes toward feminism. Sociology and Social Research, 1936 20, 512–526. (b)
Kirpatrick, C. The changing status of women, The family as process and institution. New York: The Ronald Press. 1954.
Kluckhohn, F. R. American women and American values. In L. Bryson (Ed.). Facing future risks. New York: Harper, 1953.
Komarovsky, M. Cultural contradictions and sex roles. American Journal of Sociology, 1946, 52, 184–189.
Lipman-Blumen, J. How ideology shapes women's lives. Scientific American, 1972, 226, 24–34.
Lunneborg, P. W. Stereotypic aspects in masculinity—feminity measurement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1970, 34, 113–118.
McKee, P., & Sherriffs, A. C. The differential evaluation of males and females. Journal of Personality, 1957, 25, 356–371.
McKee, P., & Sherriffs, A. C. Men's and women's beliefs, ideals, and self-concepts. American Journal of Sociology, 1959, 64, 356–363.
Motz, A. B. The role conception inventory: A tool for research in social psychology. American Sociological Review, 1952, 17, 465–471.
Nadler, E., & Morrow, W. Authoritarian attitudes toward women and their correlates. Journal of Social Psychology, 1959, 50, 113–123.
Parsons, T. Essays in sociological theory. New York: Free Press, 1954.
Rosenkrantz, P., Vogel, S., Bee, H., Broverman, I., & Broverman, D. M. Sex role stereotypes and self-concepts in college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 32(3), 287–295.
Sherriffs, A. C., & Jarrett, R. F. Sex differences in attitudes about sex differences. Journal of Psychology, 1953, 35, 161–168.
Sherriffs, A. C., & McKee, P. Qualitative aspects of beliefs about men and women. Journal of Personality, 1957, 25, 451–464.
Turner, R. H. Family interaction. New York: Wiley, 1970.
Turnipseed, D. Playboy's stereotype of the American woamn, Undergraduate research paper, Illinois State University, 1973.
Wallin, P. Cultural contradictions and sex roles: A repeat study. American Sociological Review, 1959, 15, 288–293.
Zelditch, M., Jr. Role differentiation in the nuclear family: A comparative study. In T. Parsons and R. Bales (Eds.), Family: Socialization and interaction process. New York: Free Press, 1955.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clifton, A.K., McGrath, D. & Wick, B. Stereotypes of woman: A single category?. Sex Roles 2, 135–148 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287246
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287246