The current study examined the degree of role violation necessary to produce social rejection and whether penalties for gender role violations are applied equally to male and female violators. Specifically, it was hypothesized that targets described by equal numbers of male- and female-associated characteristics would be most liked and viewed as better adjusted compared to either stereotype congruent gender role targets and stereotype incongruent gender role targets. Presumed status and presumed sexual orientation were considered as explanations for the penalties gender-role violators incur. This effect was expected to be stronger for male targets than for female targets. Although the current results were unable to clarify why role deviance leads to social rejection, results confirmed prior findings indicating that not all role violations are met with equal derogation and that mixed gender roles can be perceived as psychologically healthy. Ratings of likeability and adjustment were not affected by either mediational variable. Finally, results suggested that male role violation is not regarded more harshly than female role violation when the role violation is based on traits. / Department of Psychological Science
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/185889 |
| Date | January 1997 |
| Creators | Lee, Sarah E. |
| Contributors | Kite, Mary E. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | iv, 46 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds