Percep!uaI and Mofor Skills, 1977, 45,851-860. @ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1977
GENDER STEREOTYPES, ASCRIBED GENDER A N D SOCIAL PERCEPTION ALEXANDER C. ROSEN Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine University of California, Los AngeIes Summary.-This study studied the effects of gender labeling on the descrip tions made by naive observers (43 males and 104 females) of filmed presentations of five individuals. For several of the five individuals the chromosomal and anatomic gender was discrepant with the apparent gender assumed from dress or physical appearance. The observers were informed after the first rating of the biological gender of the five persons and were asked to repeat their descriptions. Merely changing the label, i.e., male/female, significantly altered the descriptions. The label appeared to invoke the observers' stereotypic model of male/female qualities and overrode "objective" assessment.
Contemporary concern has legitimately focused on the ways in which male and female behavior may be stereotypically defined in biased ways. A conspicuous part of the doctrine of those who struggle for equality of opportunities as well as equality of status in society for both men and women is the effect of social perception on opportunities for personal accomplishment and acceptance. The popular media as well as professional literature focused appropriate and significant attention on the influence of "sexist" perception on social behavior of both men and women (Babladelis, 1973; Christensen, 1974; Friedland, 1973; McCd, 1973; Ross, 1973). The intent of this research was to examine in part some relevant aspects of the effects of gender labeling on the perception of social behavior. The intent is to indicate how objective assessment of behavioral qualities is clearly influenced by labels the observing individual may place on the person being viewed in casual social perception. This investigation studies the effects of gender labeling, physical appearance, and overt manner of presentation on the social perception of persons. Several of the persons observed by the subjects were biologically at variance from their overt appearance, i.e., dress and manner. Persons evaluating the behavior of males and females tend to see that behavior as different and discriminable despite the fact that there is evidence in the literature that maleness and femaleness is under no circumstances a bipolar dimension in the psychological domain (Engel, 1966; Gaudreau, 1977; Bern, 1977; Bieliauskas, 1965). Measures employed to describe male and female behavior may provide no significant single or paired or triplets of significant variables which uniformly characterizes the psychological qualities of men and women in our contemporary society. The lack of correlation between various tests of masculinity and femininity in the multifactorial and multidimensional
852
A. C. ROSEN
character of these tests amply support this (Engel, 1966; Bieliauskas, 1965). Clearly the perception of oneself as male and female, as well as the perception of others regarding one's gender is based on complex factors, no one of which can by itself be a necessary and sufficient condition for the characterization of gender. It appears that what we call maleness and femaleness may be a combination of factors, any one of which may be either dominant or recessive in a particular person identified as male or female (Bem, 1977). Similarly qualities of maleness and femaleness may be independent, possibly orthogonal factors which can appear in varying amounts in both males and females. This research followed years of study of individuals who presented themselves for surgical change of gender (transsexual persons) and to others who had a need to dress and be seen in the clothing of the sex opposite from their anatomic sex. The majority of transsexual persons presenting themselves to a gender-identity study group were anatomic males wishing to become females and males feeling driven to dress as females. Concern is frequently expressed about the capacity of such persons to make a convincing shift in gender role and to assume all of the behaviors of a person of the 'sex opposite from their chromosomal and anatomic sex. For that reason, the focus in this research was primarily on male-to-female transformations and the social stimuli examined were selected to test the effectiveness of that sex-role change and the ability to "pass." The hypothesis concerned the basis on which persons respond to individuals observed. It was predicted that descriptions of the persons portrayed would be dependent on how the observers "labeled individuals as either male or female. The label of male or female was predicted to produce descriptions influenced by social stereotypes of gender-linked behavior. Specifically changing the label by instruction was predicted to change the descriptions of the individuals. It was further predicted that the observers would be more influenced by the label and/or superficial appearance (dress, clothing, etc.) in the descriptions than by actual presenting behaviors or biologic gender. THE EXPERIMENT The experiment explored the effects of altered gender labeling on a perceived social object. Observers (43 males and 104 females) were asked to describe both in narrative form and with semantic differential scales the behavioral qualities they observed in five persons. The observers were members of a college sophomore class in psychology. Four of those persons presented were in fact anatomically different from the gender in which they were presented in the demonstration, either by "manner" or in dress. One person was congruent both in presenting gender and in anatomic and biological gender. The sound and film material was selected to present the persons in an informal manner in their professed sexual and gender identity. Each of the
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
853
five persons pictured was shown standing, walking, and moving in full figure before the camera in a way judged to be comfortable and natural. The sound portion was relaxed and conversational and carefully edited to remove any "case history" material which could be even remotely used to indicate background or prior life experiences. The material presented for the five persons rated were five sequences of 16-mm motion picture film, one for each person displayed, with an accompanying sound track (not a lip-synchronized presentation, but a reasonable sampling of a series of recordings of the subjects to be rated). The sound and film were presented in a large classroom, and the observing persons were asked to describe the persons presented on 25 bipolar semantic differential scales. At the conclusion of the 25 ratings, they were asked to reverse the page and write a brief 1- or 2-min. narrative description of the subjects just viewed. The process was repeated for the same five filmed and sound sequences. With the second presentation, the group was told the actual nature and biological gender of the persons viewed. In the description of findings, the first presentation is described as the "naturalistic observation" and the second presentation was the "informed observation." The five filmed persons are described below with some of the narrative descriptions obtained in the naturalistic observation. The descriptions by the viewing subjects, that is, the experimental observers, on the first viewing were as they generally presented themselves.
RESULTS Narr~tivePindings (1) "Sallie," the first pictured individual, was a genetic, anatomic and biologic male who was a self-identified transvestite. This person was photographed while dressed as convincingly as possible in female clothing. This individual was described on first viewing as: a. A loud, bitchy, ugly person who was somewhat defensive and had been h u t . b. A middle-aged woman seeming rather bored. c. She impressed me as a very average woman, simple and warm and somewhat repulsive. Of the 147 statements obtained, only five indicated some suspicion that this might not be what it appeared, i.e., the presenting image of a woman. ( 2 ) "Bunny." The second filmed stimulus was a person who was born a genetic and anatomic male who had experienced herself increasingly as a female during puberty and pubertal years, and at the age of 19 received a sextransformation operation. The film clip presented this individual in her normal female role. Some. sampled narratives were: a. Above average college girl, but one who has just started college and acts like it.
854
A. C . ROSEN
b. Nice looking girl; she would be fun; she would be very fun and someone nice to know. c. A healthy, wholesome coed, interested in the world around her; independent but still thoughtful of others. d. Buxom blonde with awkward walk; looks self-conscious; nervous habit of jerking head. None of the 147 observers had any suspicion that this person might be a genetic male who had been through a transsexual operation. ( 3 ) "Erica" was a normal female in her mid-forties who presented herself as a female and was as she appeared to be. The description of this person in the narrative sections were quite uniform: a. The general theme was "well-mannered business woman with a nice family, few problems or worries." b. She was uniformly described as a "quiet and conservative woman." (4) "Chris," the fourth subject, was a biological and genetic female who lived as a man for a number of years and was described as a transvestite: a. A typical description was "nervous, middle-aged man." b. "Very dry sort of middle-aged man." c. "The perfect 'professor' type; easy to get along with, easy to talk to; understanding; typical middle-aged man." (5) "Fillmore." The fifth subject was a genetic anatomic male who generally lived in the male role but from time to time cross-dressed. The dress and presentation was rather grotesque on the film and was consistent with his everyday behavior. The descriptions identified this person as: a. "A transvestite; unstable, neurotic, unhappy." b. "Transvestite; awkward, obviously male; repulsive and homosexual." c. "Transvestite man, or man dressed as a woman for this film." "Ineffective as a woman; awkward and self-conscious." "Terrible failure as a 'drag' person." The narrative descriptions were uniform and consistent, marked by repulsion and an accurate description of the individual's gender. The following i r e descriptions of the individuals following the second presentation when the anatomic and biological gender had been accurately identified for the observer-viewers in the informed observation. (1) "Sallie." This individual on the second viewing was described as "really looking like a woman; shocked to hear that the subject is a male." "Certainly looks like a fairly feminine woman." "If the subject was actually masculine, this was a good acting job." "For a man, he is a good looking woman except for the wig." "I still cannot believe that she is not a woman." Many persons clearly labeled this individual as a genetic male but perceived him as a female in appearance. ,
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
855
( 2 ) "Bunny." "Quite female; hard to believe once was a male." "A beautiful girl; feminine, although childlike in her impulsive gestures." "Strong and independent; does not seem to have any male characteristics, even her walkmincing, swinging stepsappears very feminine, very nervous." "Appears to be an over-sexy female; surprised to find that the subject is really a male; rather sad for the subject." ( 3 ) "Erica." "An attractive woman in the way she handles herself and the manner in which she dresses; a good mother-figure." "Looks like an average woman who is now at the less exotic end of the scale." "Well dressed middleaged woman; pleasant personality." Summary impression is consistent with the first view of the subject, and she was seen as a typical woman. ( 4 ) "Chris." "I can't believe he is a woman." "He resembles a weak male with a feminine appearance." "Strikes me the same way as he did before, a fag." "Very masculine except for the way he crosses his legs." "Makes a better man than woman." The descriptions confirm the perception by the viewing group of a male although more of the viewers tended to see feminine characteristics following the correct information. ( 5 ) The descriptions of this subject ("Fillmore") were almost identical to those given on the first exposure, with increased disgust and repulsion.
Statistical Pindings The tables represent presentations of the semantic differential sortings and their statistical analysis. Table 1 presents the 25 bipolar semantic differential scales with the scores on the 25 scales for each of the social objects for all 147 viewing subjects before and after being informed regarding the significant gender of the viewed objects. A score of 1 was given to a rating closest to the left-hand member of the bipolar pau and a score of 7 closest to the right-hand member of the bipolar pair. A score of 4 indicated a median. range. Starred items are those where the shift in mean was significant ( 9 5 .O5). The scale scores indicate that Persons 1, 4, and 5 tended to be viewed somewhat in the feminine direction on the masculine/feminine bipolar dimension, while Persons 2 and 3 were viewed dearly as feminine. In the average scores there was very little movement in the viewing on the masculine/feminine scale for Persons 2 and 3, while 1 is seen as somewhat more repelling, as was Person 4 on the second viewing. Person 5 is seen consistently as somewhat repelling and Persons 2 and 3 were generally viewed as attractive. Interestingly Persons 1 and 5, the two transvestite persons, were seen as largely impotent while Persons 3 and 4 were seen somewhat neutral on the scale and Person 2 was seen as a potent individual. For Person 1, 20 of the bipolar scales have changed from the first rating
A. C. ROSEN
857
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
to the second at a significance level of .05 or better. Some 15 changed for Person 2, 6 for Person 3, 18 for Person 4, and 4 for Person 5. The number of significant changes suggests marked influence by the altered label on the perception of the persons being viewed. That is, wherever the label dramatically changed perception, i.e., presenting gender differed from biological gender, there were a greater number of significant changes in the mean ratings. Note in Person 3, where the viewed and biologically identified gender were the same and there was no change in the "gender" label, the ratings tended to move the least in the ratings, that is, only six items moved at the .05 percent level or better, barely more than from chance alone. Table 2 presents correlations and Osgood D-scores between mean scores of the 25 scales in the "naturalistic" and "informed" state of the 147 viewers. The greatest agreement between the two conditions was for Persons 5 and 3, persons for whom the "informed" viewing did not indicate a change of label. Greatest TABLE 2
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN25 M E A N SCALE SCORES VIEWERS SEMANTICDIFFEREN~AL RATTNGS -
-
---
correlations With and Without ~nformationBetween Means of 25 Scales 147 Observers (43 Males, 104 Females) (N= 147) Subject Subject Subject Subject Subject
1 2 3 4 5
.61 .82 .94 .74
3.68 2.71 1.44 2.59 0.70
.33
Intersubject ss With Information
Intersubject ss Without Information and D-scores S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
Scores With vs Without Information: rs Between Male and Female Observers Male Female r D r D S1 S2 s3 S4 S5
Note.-Left
.53 .92 .94 .68 .98
4.03 2.23 1.03 1.91 1.47
.62 .73 .92 .76 .99
3.73 2.83 1.86 3.00 0.85
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
rs Between M Scores on 25 Scales Male Female Without With r D r D .95 .88 .go .88 .96
1.08 2.41 2.62 1.11 1.81
.91 .89 .88 .91 .97
1.74 1.94 2.85 1.79 1.49
portion of matrix is Osgood D-score; Right portior! of matrix is Pearsonian r,
858
A. C. ROSEN
disagreement, that is, lowest correlation, was for Person 1. Intersubject correlations in the naturalistic observations indicate that Person 3, the normal female, was seen as very similar to Person 2 and somewhat different from Person 5 and unrelated in rating to Persons 1 and 4. These differences were accentuated in the informed observations as indicated in the intersubject correlations separating the viewing sample and the males and females suggests that there is somewhat greater consistency in ratings in men on Person 2 and less consistence with women, but generally the correlations suggest that both males and females viewed the five filmed persons somewhat alike. The same is true of correlations between men and women in the informed state. Table 2 also gives Osgood D-scores for the same data That statistic presents the outcome in a more dramatic form. The greater shift occurs for Person 1, the least for Person 5. The overt and blatant transvestite was described in much the same terms in both viewings, while the very convincing transvestite tended to be seen quite differently once the "correct label" was placed on him. Generally there was very little change for the correctly identified normally gendered woman. Tables of D-score differences between subjects with and without information indicated some conspicuous differences being seen between the subjects, that is, they tended to be seen as differing in intensity in their descriptions, with the greatest differences between Persons 3 and 5, the naturalistic and the informed state, and the least differences being visible between Persons 1 and 4, with an intermediate difference between Persons 2 and 3. D-scores between male and female observers with and without information yield few dramatic findings although scores between the male and female observers during the rating without information tended to change a bit when given information. That is, the correlation with information tended to be somewhat different than viewing in pictured Persons 1 and 4, and somewhat similar in Persons 2 and 5. It is appropriate to make note of the relatively high correlations between ratings with and without information, particularly for Subjects 3 and 5, and the very low D-scores for the same subjects. Looking at the two statistics side-byside, what one would assume is that there was some shift in level but generally very little shift in the pattern of rating for those two subjects who were correctly identified in their anatomic and their genetic gender, and where the labeling itself made little difference in how they were seen by observers. Generally all of the correlations and D-scores indicate that, although the movement was somewhat significant for the particular persons indicated, many of the bipolar scales did not move as the result of gender labeling. Obviously, the most critical move was for Person 1 and to some extent it appears that movement is in the leuel of rating and not in the pattern of rating. That appears to be true from looking at the correlation and D-score for that person.
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
859
Clearly being informed about the biologic and anatomic gender of the individual changed in significant amount how that person was seen. The hypothesis was confirmed that gender labeling influences the "objective" way in which individuals may be seen in the environment. The individual when viewed with a different gender label than originally identified suggests that the genderconsistent stereotype was invoked and the process of labeling influenced social judgments. The persons viewed were identical from Viewing 1 and Viewing 2; all that changed was the gender label. This speaks to sex and gender stereotyping and speaks to those factors and features which we falsely ascribed as gender-relevant in social behavior. The data make clear that individuals are influenced by labels as they make social perceptions. By social perceptions we mean the perceptions they make of other persons in the environment around them. In this instance, the presenting gender, at least as perceived through dothing and other significant indicators, is in contrast with the eventual gender as described for three and possibly four of the five filmed persons. .Since that ascribed gender was the only significant variable that altered, it must be assumed that altering that individual's perception of the gender of the social object altered and changed the person's descriptive structure for the behavior of that person and indeed "distorted the view of the person. It would be appropriate to assume that that distortion arose out of gender stereotypy. It is important to indicate that the viewing subjects in question were carefully instructed to make their descriptions as "objective" as possible in both viewings. In behavioral and psychological studies it becomes more evident that the real differences between males and females are conspicuously less evident than assumed in our social mythology. W e must therefore find ways to encourage and support individuals who would attempt to perceive accurately the behavior of others and remove from the lexicon of their observations the distortions and skewings of perceptions related to gender-role stereotypy. REFERENCES BABLADELIS, G. Sex stereoryping: students' perceptions of college professor. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973, 37, 47-50.
BIELIAUSKAS, V. Recent advances in the psychology of masculinity and femininity. Journ d of Psychology, 1965, 60, 255-263.
CHRISTENSEN, L. The influence of trait, sex, and information on accuracy of personality , assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1974, 38, 130-135. EDWARDS,.B.C., & MCWILLIAMS, J. M. Expressor sex, perceiver personality, and cognltlve perception. Journal of Psychology, 1974, 87, 137-141. ENGEL,I. M. A factor analytic study of items from five masculinity-femininity tests. J o u ~ n do f Consulting Psychology, 1966, 30, 565. FRIEDLAND, S. J., CROCKETT,W. H., & LAIRD,J. D. The effects of role and sex on the perception of others. Journal of Socid Psychology, 1973, 91, 273-283. GAUDREAU, P. Factor analysis of the Bern Sex-role Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1977, 45, 299-302.
860
A. C . ROSEN
GITIBR, A. G., & EPSTRIN.R. Gilding: social role and sex differences. CRC Report, 1971, No. 60. McCALL, J., & RAE, G . Inferential sets and person perception: a partial replication and extension. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973, 37, 479-482. Ross, S., & W A L ~ RJ.S , Perceptions of a sample of university men concerning women. Jousnal of Genetic Psychology, 1973, 122, 329-336. Accepted August 17, 1977.
GENDER STEREOTYPES, ASCRIBED GENDER A N D SOCIAL PERCEPTION ALEXANDER C. ROSEN Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine University of California, Los AngeIes Summary.-This study studied the effects of gender labeling on the descrip tions made by naive observers (43 males and 104 females) of filmed presentations of five individuals. For several of the five individuals the chromosomal and anatomic gender was discrepant with the apparent gender assumed from dress or physical appearance. The observers were informed after the first rating of the biological gender of the five persons and were asked to repeat their descriptions. Merely changing the label, i.e., male/female, significantly altered the descriptions. The label appeared to invoke the observers' stereotypic model of male/female qualities and overrode "objective" assessment.
Contemporary concern has legitimately focused on the ways in which male and female behavior may be stereotypically defined in biased ways. A conspicuous part of the doctrine of those who struggle for equality of opportunities as well as equality of status in society for both men and women is the effect of social perception on opportunities for personal accomplishment and acceptance. The popular media as well as professional literature focused appropriate and significant attention on the influence of "sexist" perception on social behavior of both men and women (Babladelis, 1973; Christensen, 1974; Friedland, 1973; McCd, 1973; Ross, 1973). The intent of this research was to examine in part some relevant aspects of the effects of gender labeling on the perception of social behavior. The intent is to indicate how objective assessment of behavioral qualities is clearly influenced by labels the observing individual may place on the person being viewed in casual social perception. This investigation studies the effects of gender labeling, physical appearance, and overt manner of presentation on the social perception of persons. Several of the persons observed by the subjects were biologically at variance from their overt appearance, i.e., dress and manner. Persons evaluating the behavior of males and females tend to see that behavior as different and discriminable despite the fact that there is evidence in the literature that maleness and femaleness is under no circumstances a bipolar dimension in the psychological domain (Engel, 1966; Gaudreau, 1977; Bern, 1977; Bieliauskas, 1965). Measures employed to describe male and female behavior may provide no significant single or paired or triplets of significant variables which uniformly characterizes the psychological qualities of men and women in our contemporary society. The lack of correlation between various tests of masculinity and femininity in the multifactorial and multidimensional
852
A. C. ROSEN
character of these tests amply support this (Engel, 1966; Bieliauskas, 1965). Clearly the perception of oneself as male and female, as well as the perception of others regarding one's gender is based on complex factors, no one of which can by itself be a necessary and sufficient condition for the characterization of gender. It appears that what we call maleness and femaleness may be a combination of factors, any one of which may be either dominant or recessive in a particular person identified as male or female (Bem, 1977). Similarly qualities of maleness and femaleness may be independent, possibly orthogonal factors which can appear in varying amounts in both males and females. This research followed years of study of individuals who presented themselves for surgical change of gender (transsexual persons) and to others who had a need to dress and be seen in the clothing of the sex opposite from their anatomic sex. The majority of transsexual persons presenting themselves to a gender-identity study group were anatomic males wishing to become females and males feeling driven to dress as females. Concern is frequently expressed about the capacity of such persons to make a convincing shift in gender role and to assume all of the behaviors of a person of the 'sex opposite from their chromosomal and anatomic sex. For that reason, the focus in this research was primarily on male-to-female transformations and the social stimuli examined were selected to test the effectiveness of that sex-role change and the ability to "pass." The hypothesis concerned the basis on which persons respond to individuals observed. It was predicted that descriptions of the persons portrayed would be dependent on how the observers "labeled individuals as either male or female. The label of male or female was predicted to produce descriptions influenced by social stereotypes of gender-linked behavior. Specifically changing the label by instruction was predicted to change the descriptions of the individuals. It was further predicted that the observers would be more influenced by the label and/or superficial appearance (dress, clothing, etc.) in the descriptions than by actual presenting behaviors or biologic gender. THE EXPERIMENT The experiment explored the effects of altered gender labeling on a perceived social object. Observers (43 males and 104 females) were asked to describe both in narrative form and with semantic differential scales the behavioral qualities they observed in five persons. The observers were members of a college sophomore class in psychology. Four of those persons presented were in fact anatomically different from the gender in which they were presented in the demonstration, either by "manner" or in dress. One person was congruent both in presenting gender and in anatomic and biological gender. The sound and film material was selected to present the persons in an informal manner in their professed sexual and gender identity. Each of the
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
853
five persons pictured was shown standing, walking, and moving in full figure before the camera in a way judged to be comfortable and natural. The sound portion was relaxed and conversational and carefully edited to remove any "case history" material which could be even remotely used to indicate background or prior life experiences. The material presented for the five persons rated were five sequences of 16-mm motion picture film, one for each person displayed, with an accompanying sound track (not a lip-synchronized presentation, but a reasonable sampling of a series of recordings of the subjects to be rated). The sound and film were presented in a large classroom, and the observing persons were asked to describe the persons presented on 25 bipolar semantic differential scales. At the conclusion of the 25 ratings, they were asked to reverse the page and write a brief 1- or 2-min. narrative description of the subjects just viewed. The process was repeated for the same five filmed and sound sequences. With the second presentation, the group was told the actual nature and biological gender of the persons viewed. In the description of findings, the first presentation is described as the "naturalistic observation" and the second presentation was the "informed observation." The five filmed persons are described below with some of the narrative descriptions obtained in the naturalistic observation. The descriptions by the viewing subjects, that is, the experimental observers, on the first viewing were as they generally presented themselves.
RESULTS Narr~tivePindings (1) "Sallie," the first pictured individual, was a genetic, anatomic and biologic male who was a self-identified transvestite. This person was photographed while dressed as convincingly as possible in female clothing. This individual was described on first viewing as: a. A loud, bitchy, ugly person who was somewhat defensive and had been h u t . b. A middle-aged woman seeming rather bored. c. She impressed me as a very average woman, simple and warm and somewhat repulsive. Of the 147 statements obtained, only five indicated some suspicion that this might not be what it appeared, i.e., the presenting image of a woman. ( 2 ) "Bunny." The second filmed stimulus was a person who was born a genetic and anatomic male who had experienced herself increasingly as a female during puberty and pubertal years, and at the age of 19 received a sextransformation operation. The film clip presented this individual in her normal female role. Some. sampled narratives were: a. Above average college girl, but one who has just started college and acts like it.
854
A. C . ROSEN
b. Nice looking girl; she would be fun; she would be very fun and someone nice to know. c. A healthy, wholesome coed, interested in the world around her; independent but still thoughtful of others. d. Buxom blonde with awkward walk; looks self-conscious; nervous habit of jerking head. None of the 147 observers had any suspicion that this person might be a genetic male who had been through a transsexual operation. ( 3 ) "Erica" was a normal female in her mid-forties who presented herself as a female and was as she appeared to be. The description of this person in the narrative sections were quite uniform: a. The general theme was "well-mannered business woman with a nice family, few problems or worries." b. She was uniformly described as a "quiet and conservative woman." (4) "Chris," the fourth subject, was a biological and genetic female who lived as a man for a number of years and was described as a transvestite: a. A typical description was "nervous, middle-aged man." b. "Very dry sort of middle-aged man." c. "The perfect 'professor' type; easy to get along with, easy to talk to; understanding; typical middle-aged man." (5) "Fillmore." The fifth subject was a genetic anatomic male who generally lived in the male role but from time to time cross-dressed. The dress and presentation was rather grotesque on the film and was consistent with his everyday behavior. The descriptions identified this person as: a. "A transvestite; unstable, neurotic, unhappy." b. "Transvestite; awkward, obviously male; repulsive and homosexual." c. "Transvestite man, or man dressed as a woman for this film." "Ineffective as a woman; awkward and self-conscious." "Terrible failure as a 'drag' person." The narrative descriptions were uniform and consistent, marked by repulsion and an accurate description of the individual's gender. The following i r e descriptions of the individuals following the second presentation when the anatomic and biological gender had been accurately identified for the observer-viewers in the informed observation. (1) "Sallie." This individual on the second viewing was described as "really looking like a woman; shocked to hear that the subject is a male." "Certainly looks like a fairly feminine woman." "If the subject was actually masculine, this was a good acting job." "For a man, he is a good looking woman except for the wig." "I still cannot believe that she is not a woman." Many persons clearly labeled this individual as a genetic male but perceived him as a female in appearance. ,
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
855
( 2 ) "Bunny." "Quite female; hard to believe once was a male." "A beautiful girl; feminine, although childlike in her impulsive gestures." "Strong and independent; does not seem to have any male characteristics, even her walkmincing, swinging stepsappears very feminine, very nervous." "Appears to be an over-sexy female; surprised to find that the subject is really a male; rather sad for the subject." ( 3 ) "Erica." "An attractive woman in the way she handles herself and the manner in which she dresses; a good mother-figure." "Looks like an average woman who is now at the less exotic end of the scale." "Well dressed middleaged woman; pleasant personality." Summary impression is consistent with the first view of the subject, and she was seen as a typical woman. ( 4 ) "Chris." "I can't believe he is a woman." "He resembles a weak male with a feminine appearance." "Strikes me the same way as he did before, a fag." "Very masculine except for the way he crosses his legs." "Makes a better man than woman." The descriptions confirm the perception by the viewing group of a male although more of the viewers tended to see feminine characteristics following the correct information. ( 5 ) The descriptions of this subject ("Fillmore") were almost identical to those given on the first exposure, with increased disgust and repulsion.
Statistical Pindings The tables represent presentations of the semantic differential sortings and their statistical analysis. Table 1 presents the 25 bipolar semantic differential scales with the scores on the 25 scales for each of the social objects for all 147 viewing subjects before and after being informed regarding the significant gender of the viewed objects. A score of 1 was given to a rating closest to the left-hand member of the bipolar pau and a score of 7 closest to the right-hand member of the bipolar pair. A score of 4 indicated a median. range. Starred items are those where the shift in mean was significant ( 9 5 .O5). The scale scores indicate that Persons 1, 4, and 5 tended to be viewed somewhat in the feminine direction on the masculine/feminine bipolar dimension, while Persons 2 and 3 were viewed dearly as feminine. In the average scores there was very little movement in the viewing on the masculine/feminine scale for Persons 2 and 3, while 1 is seen as somewhat more repelling, as was Person 4 on the second viewing. Person 5 is seen consistently as somewhat repelling and Persons 2 and 3 were generally viewed as attractive. Interestingly Persons 1 and 5, the two transvestite persons, were seen as largely impotent while Persons 3 and 4 were seen somewhat neutral on the scale and Person 2 was seen as a potent individual. For Person 1, 20 of the bipolar scales have changed from the first rating
A. C. ROSEN
857
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
to the second at a significance level of .05 or better. Some 15 changed for Person 2, 6 for Person 3, 18 for Person 4, and 4 for Person 5. The number of significant changes suggests marked influence by the altered label on the perception of the persons being viewed. That is, wherever the label dramatically changed perception, i.e., presenting gender differed from biological gender, there were a greater number of significant changes in the mean ratings. Note in Person 3, where the viewed and biologically identified gender were the same and there was no change in the "gender" label, the ratings tended to move the least in the ratings, that is, only six items moved at the .05 percent level or better, barely more than from chance alone. Table 2 presents correlations and Osgood D-scores between mean scores of the 25 scales in the "naturalistic" and "informed" state of the 147 viewers. The greatest agreement between the two conditions was for Persons 5 and 3, persons for whom the "informed" viewing did not indicate a change of label. Greatest TABLE 2
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN25 M E A N SCALE SCORES VIEWERS SEMANTICDIFFEREN~AL RATTNGS -
-
---
correlations With and Without ~nformationBetween Means of 25 Scales 147 Observers (43 Males, 104 Females) (N= 147) Subject Subject Subject Subject Subject
1 2 3 4 5
.61 .82 .94 .74
3.68 2.71 1.44 2.59 0.70
.33
Intersubject ss With Information
Intersubject ss Without Information and D-scores S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
Scores With vs Without Information: rs Between Male and Female Observers Male Female r D r D S1 S2 s3 S4 S5
Note.-Left
.53 .92 .94 .68 .98
4.03 2.23 1.03 1.91 1.47
.62 .73 .92 .76 .99
3.73 2.83 1.86 3.00 0.85
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
rs Between M Scores on 25 Scales Male Female Without With r D r D .95 .88 .go .88 .96
1.08 2.41 2.62 1.11 1.81
.91 .89 .88 .91 .97
1.74 1.94 2.85 1.79 1.49
portion of matrix is Osgood D-score; Right portior! of matrix is Pearsonian r,
858
A. C. ROSEN
disagreement, that is, lowest correlation, was for Person 1. Intersubject correlations in the naturalistic observations indicate that Person 3, the normal female, was seen as very similar to Person 2 and somewhat different from Person 5 and unrelated in rating to Persons 1 and 4. These differences were accentuated in the informed observations as indicated in the intersubject correlations separating the viewing sample and the males and females suggests that there is somewhat greater consistency in ratings in men on Person 2 and less consistence with women, but generally the correlations suggest that both males and females viewed the five filmed persons somewhat alike. The same is true of correlations between men and women in the informed state. Table 2 also gives Osgood D-scores for the same data That statistic presents the outcome in a more dramatic form. The greater shift occurs for Person 1, the least for Person 5. The overt and blatant transvestite was described in much the same terms in both viewings, while the very convincing transvestite tended to be seen quite differently once the "correct label" was placed on him. Generally there was very little change for the correctly identified normally gendered woman. Tables of D-score differences between subjects with and without information indicated some conspicuous differences being seen between the subjects, that is, they tended to be seen as differing in intensity in their descriptions, with the greatest differences between Persons 3 and 5, the naturalistic and the informed state, and the least differences being visible between Persons 1 and 4, with an intermediate difference between Persons 2 and 3. D-scores between male and female observers with and without information yield few dramatic findings although scores between the male and female observers during the rating without information tended to change a bit when given information. That is, the correlation with information tended to be somewhat different than viewing in pictured Persons 1 and 4, and somewhat similar in Persons 2 and 5. It is appropriate to make note of the relatively high correlations between ratings with and without information, particularly for Subjects 3 and 5, and the very low D-scores for the same subjects. Looking at the two statistics side-byside, what one would assume is that there was some shift in level but generally very little shift in the pattern of rating for those two subjects who were correctly identified in their anatomic and their genetic gender, and where the labeling itself made little difference in how they were seen by observers. Generally all of the correlations and D-scores indicate that, although the movement was somewhat significant for the particular persons indicated, many of the bipolar scales did not move as the result of gender labeling. Obviously, the most critical move was for Person 1 and to some extent it appears that movement is in the leuel of rating and not in the pattern of rating. That appears to be true from looking at the correlation and D-score for that person.
GENDER AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION
859
Clearly being informed about the biologic and anatomic gender of the individual changed in significant amount how that person was seen. The hypothesis was confirmed that gender labeling influences the "objective" way in which individuals may be seen in the environment. The individual when viewed with a different gender label than originally identified suggests that the genderconsistent stereotype was invoked and the process of labeling influenced social judgments. The persons viewed were identical from Viewing 1 and Viewing 2; all that changed was the gender label. This speaks to sex and gender stereotyping and speaks to those factors and features which we falsely ascribed as gender-relevant in social behavior. The data make clear that individuals are influenced by labels as they make social perceptions. By social perceptions we mean the perceptions they make of other persons in the environment around them. In this instance, the presenting gender, at least as perceived through dothing and other significant indicators, is in contrast with the eventual gender as described for three and possibly four of the five filmed persons. .Since that ascribed gender was the only significant variable that altered, it must be assumed that altering that individual's perception of the gender of the social object altered and changed the person's descriptive structure for the behavior of that person and indeed "distorted the view of the person. It would be appropriate to assume that that distortion arose out of gender stereotypy. It is important to indicate that the viewing subjects in question were carefully instructed to make their descriptions as "objective" as possible in both viewings. In behavioral and psychological studies it becomes more evident that the real differences between males and females are conspicuously less evident than assumed in our social mythology. W e must therefore find ways to encourage and support individuals who would attempt to perceive accurately the behavior of others and remove from the lexicon of their observations the distortions and skewings of perceptions related to gender-role stereotypy. REFERENCES BABLADELIS, G. Sex stereoryping: students' perceptions of college professor. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973, 37, 47-50.
BIELIAUSKAS, V. Recent advances in the psychology of masculinity and femininity. Journ d of Psychology, 1965, 60, 255-263.
CHRISTENSEN, L. The influence of trait, sex, and information on accuracy of personality , assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 1974, 38, 130-135. EDWARDS,.B.C., & MCWILLIAMS, J. M. Expressor sex, perceiver personality, and cognltlve perception. Journal of Psychology, 1974, 87, 137-141. ENGEL,I. M. A factor analytic study of items from five masculinity-femininity tests. J o u ~ n do f Consulting Psychology, 1966, 30, 565. FRIEDLAND, S. J., CROCKETT,W. H., & LAIRD,J. D. The effects of role and sex on the perception of others. Journal of Socid Psychology, 1973, 91, 273-283. GAUDREAU, P. Factor analysis of the Bern Sex-role Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1977, 45, 299-302.
860
A. C . ROSEN
GITIBR, A. G., & EPSTRIN.R. Gilding: social role and sex differences. CRC Report, 1971, No. 60. McCALL, J., & RAE, G . Inferential sets and person perception: a partial replication and extension. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973, 37, 479-482. Ross, S., & W A L ~ RJ.S , Perceptions of a sample of university men concerning women. Jousnal of Genetic Psychology, 1973, 122, 329-336. Accepted August 17, 1977.
