How do you self-categorize? Gender and sexual orientation self-categorization in homosexual/heterosexual men and women

Life satisfaction in Europe and Iran: the role of self-esteem, gender identification and ambivalent sexism

Life satisfaction is one of the most relevant indicators of psychological health. The present study aimed at extending previous research on life satisfaction by examining its antecedents for men and women in five countries (e.g., Italy, Poland, Romania, the UK, and Iran), with different levels of gender equality, according to the Global Gender Gap Index. Besides traditional variables (i.e., age, self-esteem and income), we also investigated the role of ambivalent sexism and gender identification. Participants were 2561 adults (54% female). Results showed the key role of self-esteem for both men and women and across countries. Gender identification was positively associated with life satisfaction, with the only exception of the more gender egalitarian country, i.e., the UK. Furthermore, in the less egalitarian countries, i.e., Italy and Iran, life satisfaction is also positively related to benevolent stereotypes toward men. Taken together, findings underline the interdependence between personal and contextual dimensions in sustaining life satisfaction, and the role of gender as a significant variable in terms of both the existence of different patterns for men and women and the effects of gender stereotypes across cultures.

An investigation of quantitative methods for assessing intersectionality in health research: A systematic review

Intersectionality is a theoretical framework that investigates how interlocking systems of power and oppression at the societal level influence the lived experiences of historically and socially marginalized groups. Currently, there are no consistent or widely adopted quantitative methods to investigate research questions informed by intersectionality theory. The objective of this systematic review is to describe the current landscape of quantitative methods used to assess intersectionality and to provide recommendations on analytic best practices for future research. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science in December 2019 to identify studies using analytic quantitative intersectionality approaches published up to December 2019 (PROSPERO CRD42020162686). To be included in the study, articles had to: (1) be empirical research, (2) use a quantitative statistical method, (3) be published in English, and (4) incorporate intersectionality. Our initial search yielded 1889 articles. After screening by title/abstract, methods, and full text review, our final analytic sample included 153 papers. Eight unique classes of quantitative methods were identified, with the majority of studies employing regression with an interaction term. We additionally identified several methods which appear to be at odds with the key tenets of intersectionality. As quantitative intersectionality continues to expand, careful attention is needed to avoid the dilution of the core tenets. Specifically, emphasis on social power is needed as methods continue to be adopted and developed. Additionally, clear explanation of the selection of statistical approaches is needed and, when using regression with interaction terms, researchers should opt for use of the additive scale. Finally, use of methods that are potentially at odds with the tenets of intersectionality should be avoided.

Group meaningfulness and the causal direction of influence between the ingroup and the self or another individual: Evidence from the Induction-Deduction Paradigm

The goal of the present study was to investigate the causal direction of influence between the ingroup as a whole and the self or another ingroup member considering a key feature of groups, i.e., their perceived meaningfulness. To this goal, in Study 1, 2, and 3 we predicted a preference for self-stereotyping and ingroup-stereotyping in the meaningful social categories of sorority women, left-handed people and psychology students. In Study 4 we further expect that the meaningfulness attributed to a group moderates the direction of causality between individual and ingroup perception. Thus, we used one’s Zodiac sign as the ingroup whose degree of meaningfulness varies across participants and we hypothesized higher levels of meaningfulness attributed to the ingroup to be associated with higher self- and ingroup-stereotyping. Using the methodologically stringent Induction Deduction Paradigm, participants were given information on unfamiliar dimensions, about either the ingroup or an individual (self or other ingroup member) and asked to make inferences on those same attributes about the ingroup (induction condition) or the individual (deduction condition). As predicted, a preference for deduction to the self (i.e., self-stereotyping) and deduction to another ingroup member (i.e., ingroup-stereotyping) were found for the meaningful groups of sorority women, left-handed people, and Psychology students (Studies 1, 2, and 3). In Study 4, consistent with predictions, the higher the level of attributed meaningfulness to the Zodiac system the higher the degree of deduction both to the self (self-stereotyping) and to another Zodiac ingroup member (ingroup-stereotyping). Several implications of these results are discussed, for example in relation to the possibility of educational interventions aimed at invalidating intergroup differences.

Mu-Suppression as an Indicator of Empathic Processes in Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Adults

Self-reported empathy differs with gender and sexual orientation. The current study investigated whether mu-suppression, reflecting brain activity especially related to state empathy, also is modulated by gender and sexual orientation. Pictures of painful and non-painful actions were presented to 20 lesbians, 20 gay men, 20 heterosexual men and 20 heterosexual women, while EEG was recorded. Individual peak frequencies of mu-activity (electrodes C3, C4) were detected within the 6-11 Hz band for each participant, and mu-suppression indices were calculated. Further, verbal indicators of state empathy (pain ratings) and compassion were assessed. Only heterosexual individuals showed the typical pattern of enhanced mu-suppression in response to painful relative to non-painful pictures. Lesbian women and gay men did not show a differential mu-response. Moreover, they felt less compassion compared to heterosexual individuals. In line with this finding, the more compassion the participants reported, the stronger the mu-suppression in response to painful relative to non-painful pictures was. Pain ratings did not vary with sexual orientation. The lesser compassion reported by lesbian women and gay men is discussed as a mediator of their non-differential mu-suppression response. It is hypothesized that this pattern might relate to gay men and lesbian women tending to perceive the anonymous depicted actors as outgroup members, hence showing less compassion and reduced mu-suppression. As empathy is often related to negative feelings (empathic stress), a clear distinction between individuals to empathize with versus individuals not to emphasize with may well be an adaptive feature in same-sex oriented individuals.

A Leader Doesn’t Sound Lesbian!: The Impact of Sexual Orientation Vocal Cues on Heterosexual Persons’ First Impression and Hiring Decision

In three studies ( N = 340), we tested whether vocal cues to a person’s sexual orientation prompted sexual orientation discrimination in heterosexual individuals when hiring leaders. Our results inform how gender and sexual orientation intersect to produce discriminatory effects in the hiring context. Heterosexual participants listened to short clips of voices that sounded like job candidate was a lesbian or heterosexual woman, or a gay or heterosexual man, and rated all for job suitability and employability. Candidates applied for jobs as leaders (Study 1), as leaders or assistants (Study 2), and for leadership roles that varied in both gender role and status (Study 3). Sexual orientation discrimination occurred in all three studies and was greater among women job candidates. Refuting role congruity theory, several findings disconfirmed the prediction that lesbian-sounding women would be advantaged when stereotyped as masculine and when applying for leadership roles. Rather, in line with status-beliefs theory, lesbian-sounding women and gay-sounding men were rated and ranked poorly to the extent that they were perceived as less competent than heterosexual candidates. Findings suggest that hiring discrimination occurs in subtle ways, such as when individuals sound gay/lesbian. This has implications for recruitment as well as sexual-orientation discrimination court cases. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684319891168