Estimating the Prevalence of Gender-Biased Language in Undergraduates’ Everyday Speech
Name:
Prevalence_of_Gender-Biased_La ...
Size:
615.7Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Dept PsycholIssue Date
2020-01Keywords
GenderGender studies
Gender inequality
Language & languages
Masculinity
Sexism in language
Non-sexist language
Gender-fair language
Male bias
Androcentrism
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERSCitation
MacArthur, H.J., Cundiff, J.L. & Mehl, M.R. Estimating the Prevalence of Gender-Biased Language in Undergraduates’ Everyday Speech. Sex Roles 82, 81–93 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01033-zJournal
SEX ROLESRights
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Research has shown that language can be gender-biased; however, little research has investigated the prevalence of this bias in everyday speech. Using recordings sampled from undergraduates' daily conversations, we investigated two forms of gender bias: paternalism through use of the infantilizing label girl to refer to women and androcentrism through a tendency to use more masculine (e.g., man, guy) than feminine (e.g., girl, woman) labels in everyday speech. U.S. participants (n = 175) wore the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR), a device that recorded sound samples from their environments for 30 s every 12.5 min, for up to 4 days. Verbatim transcripts were then analyzed for instances of commonly used labels for females and males (e.g., girl, woman, boy, man). Results indicated that the label girl surpassed all other labels for women, as well as boy labels for men. We also found evidence of a masculine-label bias: Participants used masculine labels more frequently than feminine labels overall. These findings indicate the need for future research to investigate the potential consequences of infantilizing and androcentric language as well as the need for teachers, professors, clinicians, and practitioners of all types to be mindful of how their speech may include, exclude, or infantilize people based on gender.Note
12 month embargo; published online: 21 March 2019ISSN
0360-0025EISSN
1573-2762Version
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1007/s11199-019-01033-z