| 1. |
- Sikström, Sverker, et al.
(author)
-
Weighting power by preference eliminates gender differences
- 2020
-
In: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 15:11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Power can be applied in different domains (e.g., politics, work, romantic relationships, family etc.), however, we do not always reflect on which domains we have power in and how important power in these domains is. A dominant idea is that men have more power than women. This notion may be biased because the concept of power is associated with public life. We introduce the concept of preference-weighted power (PWP), a measure of power that includes different domains in life, weighted by the domains’ subjective importance. Two studies investigated power from this perspective. In Study 1, participants generated words related to power, which were quantified/categorized by latent semantic analysis to develop a semantic measure of the power construct. In Study 2, we computed a PWP index by weighting the participants' self-rated power in different power domains with the importance of having power in that domain. Together the studies suggest that men have more perceived power in the public domain, however, this domain has a lower preference weighting than the private domain where women have more power than men. Finally, when preferences for power in different domains were considered, no gender differences were observed. These results emphasize gender difference in different domains and may change how we perceive men’s and women’s power in our society.
|
|
| 2. |
- Sikström, Sverker, et al.
(author)
-
What you say and what I hear-Investigating differences in the perception of the severity of psychological and physical violence in intimate partner relationships
- 2021
-
In: PLOS ONE. - San Francisco, CA, United States : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1932-6203. ; 16:8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The correct communication of the severity of violence is essential in the context of legal trials, custody cases, support of victims, etc., for providing fair treatment. A narrator that communicates their experiences of interpersonal violence may rate the seriousness of the incident differently than a rater reading the narrators text, suggesting that there exist perceptual differences (PD) in severity ratings between the narrator and the rater. We propose that these perceptual differences may depend on whether the narrative is based on physical or psychological violence, and on gender differences. Physical violence may be evaluated as more serious by the receiver of the narrative than by the narrator (Calibration PD), whereas the seriousness of psychological violence may be difficult to convey, leading to a discrepancy in the seriousness ratings between the narrator and the rater (Accuracy PD). In addition, gender stereotypes may influence the seriousness rating (Gender PD), resulting in violence against women being perceived as more serious than the same violence against men. These perceptual differences were investigated in 3 phases using a new experimental procedure. In Phase 1, 113 narrators provided descriptions and seriousness ratings of self-experienced physical and psychological violence in relationships. In Phase 2, 340 independent raters rated the seriousness of 10 randomly selected narrations from Phase 1. In Phase 3, the genders in the narrations were changed to the opposite gender, and seriousness ratings were collected from 340 different raters. Our results confirmed the hypothesized perceptual differences. Violence to male victims was considerably more likely to be seen as severe when the raters were misled to believe the victim was a woman. We propose that these data provide practical guidelines for how to deal with misinformation in the communication of violence. The data also show that mean values and the confidence of such severity ratings need to be adjusted for several factors, such as whether it is self-experienced or communicated, the type of violence, and the gender of the victims and raters.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sikström, Sverker, et al.
(author)
-
Women Are Perceived to Have More Power Than Men in Domains That Are Viewed As Important in U.S. Tweets
- 2023
-
In: Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. - : Mary Ann Liebert Inc. - 2152-2723 .- 2152-2715. ; 26:5, s. 332-337
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Previous research of gender differences in power has largely focused on the public domain (e.g., leadership positions), and to a lesser extent power on the private domain (e.g., power in private relationships), where people may perceive these domains to be more or less important in their lives. We studied gender differences in preference weighted power (PWP) in different domains by weighting the perceived power by the perceived importance in life in a large set of Twitter messages from the United States ( N = 9,286,471). The results showed that men (tweets including "he") are semantically related to general power, and women (tweets including "she") are related to importance in life, which in previous research have been connected to the public and private domains, respectively. Importantly, women had higher PWP than men. In conclusion, men are perceived to have more general power and women more PWP in U.S. tweets.
|
|
| 4. |
- Stille, Lotta, et al.
(author)
-
Language and gender : Computerized text analyses predict gender ratios from organizational descriptions
- 2023
-
In: Frontiers in Psychology. - : Frontiers Media S.A.. - 1664-1078. ; 13
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Previous research has shown that language in job adverts implicitly communicates gender stereotypes, which, in turn, influence employees’ perceived fit with the job. In this way, language both reflects and maintains a gender segregated job market. The aim of this study was to test whether, and how, language in organizational descriptions reflects gender segregation in the organizations by the use of computational text analyses. We analyzed large Swedish companies’ organizational descriptions from LinkedIn (N = 409), testing whether the language in the organizational descriptions is associated with the organizations’ employee gender ratio, and how organizational descriptions for organizations with a majority of women and men employees differ. The statistical analyses showed that language in the organizational descriptions predicted the employee gender ratio in organizations well. Word clouds depicting words that differentiate between organizations with a majority of women and men employees showed that the language of organizations with a higher percentage of women employees was characterized by a local focus and emphasis on within-organizations relations, whereas the language of organizations with a higher percentage of men employees was characterized by an international focus and emphasis on sales and customer relations. These results imply that the language in organizational descriptions reflects gender segregation and stereotypes that women are associated with local and men with global workplaces. As language communicates subtle signals in regards to what potential candidate is most sought after in recruitment situations, differences in organizational descriptions can hinder underrepresented gender groups to apply to these jobs. As a consequence, such practices may contribute to gender segregation on the job market.
|
|
| 5. |
- Stille, Lotta, et al.
(author)
-
Self-delivered misinformation - Merging the choice blindness and misinformation effect paradigms
- 2017
-
In: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 12:3
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Choice blindness is the failure to detect a discrepancy between a choice and its outcome. The misinformation effect occurs when the recollection of an event changes because new, misleading information about the event is received. The purpose of this study was to merge the choice blindness and misinformation effect paradigms, and thus examine whether choice blindness can be created for individuals’ recollections of a witnessed event, and whether this will affect their later recollections of the event. Thus, as a way of delivering misinformation the participants ostensibly became their own source of the misleading information. The participants watched a short film and filled out a questionnaire about events shown in the film. Some of their answers were then manipulated using reattachable stickers, which allowed alteration of their original answers. The participants gave justifications for their manipulated choices, and later their recollection of the original event was tested through another questionnaire. Choice blindness was created for a majority of the participants. A majority of the choice blind participants later changed their reported recollection of the event in line with the manipulations, whereas only a small minority of the participants in the control condition changed their recollection. This study provides new information about the misinformation effect, suggesting that this effect also can occur when misinformation is given immediately following presentation of the original stimuli, and about choice blindness and its effects on the recollections of events. The results suggest that memory blindness can be created when people inadvertently supply themselves with misleading information about an event, causing a change in their recollection.
|
|
