ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Men in the Office, Women in the Kitchen? ContextualDependency of Gender Stereotype Activationin Spanish Women

Soledad de Lemus & Miguel Moya & Juan Lupiáñez &

Marcin Bukowski

# Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract In a set of two studies, we tested whether gender-stereotypical associations are automatically activated by Span-ish women in a categorization task, and how this process isconditioned by the context in which the target is presented(kitchen vs. office). We hypothesized that gender stereotypeswould be activated implicitly when the target (men vs. wom-en) appeared in an office context (associated with male dom-inant roles), but not when they appeared in a kitchen context(traditionally associated with female roles). The studies wereconducted with two samples (N =44; N =47) of female under-graduate students from the University of Granada (Spain). Inboth studies, a priming effect was found, indicating that atraditional, role-congruent stereotype pattern (men-compe-tence, women-warmth) emerged when primes appeared inan office context, but not in a kitchen context. Further, nega-tive competence traits were evaluated faster when a maleprime was presented in the context of a kitchen (role-incongruent). The purpose of Study 2 was to clarify theimplicit nature of this contextual contingency effect by ma-nipulating the controllability of the priming effect (i.e., Stim-ulus Onset Asynchrony duration-SOA, and restricted re-sponse time). The results of Study 1 were replicated in onlythe short SOA condition, which implies faster and presumablyless controlled processing of the stimuli. Theoretical implica-tions for stereotyping and gender role research are discussed.

Keywords Gender stereotypes . Competence/agency andwarmth/communion . Sexism . Gender roles . Implicitmeasures . Malleability . Social roles

Introduction

How do women perceive their own group and the outgroup(men) in terms of warmth and competence, depending on thesituational context (e.g., gender role)? This is a socially rele-vant issue since the two dimensions—competence/agency andwarmth/communion—are considered fundamental in socialperception in the case of gender (e.g., Abele 2003, in aGerman sample); moreover, they are perceived as universalacross cultures (Fiske et al. 2007). In this research, we inves-tigate this question linked to specific situations or contexts thatare traditionally associated with power differences (e.g., anoffice setting), which reinforce status-defining social stereo-types (Ridgeway 2001), or are less hierarchical and morecommunal (e.g., a home kitchen) and might allow the lowstatus groups to challenge such pervasive social stereotypes.We are specifically interested in the perspective of women , asmembers of a disadvantaged group, in the evaluation of gen-der stereotypical information when male and female socialroles are primed. The experience of disadvantage for certainindividuals and groups within society differentiates them fromother groups that benefit from any such situation (Operarioet al. 1998; Tajfel and Turner 1979), and this is the case ofwomen compared to men. For instance, men havehigher status jobs (e.g., see Barreto et al. 2009, forEuropean and North American figures on job distribu-tion by gender), and are better paid (see Kulich et al.2011, for world figures on the pay gap) compared towomen. In particular, we focus on young Spanish wom-en (undergraduates); however, our research is potentiallyinteresting for readers from different countries, as the

M. Moya : J. LupiáñezUniversidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

M. BukowskiJagellonian University, Krakow, Poland

S. de Lemus (*)Departamento de Psicología Social, Facultad de Psicología,Universidad de Granada, Campus de Cartuja, s/n,Granada 18011, Spaine-mail: slemus@ugr.es

Sex RolesDOI 10.1007/s11199-013-0328-6

response processes of discrimination targets could begeneralized for other culturally-specific situations.

The main research question for us is whether gender rolesinfluence women’s categorization of gender stereotypical in-formation with regard to competence and warmth. Further-more, we are interested in examining whether this processoccurs at an implicit level of processing. For our purpose, weused a word categorization task primed with men and womenappearing in two different contexts (i.e., office vs. kitchen) intwo experimental studies, using less (Study 1) or more (Study2) constrained time-response conditions. In order to under-stand the meaning of these two contexts, we first conducted apilot study, as described below.

An office context is traditionally associated with men (e.g.,Eagly and Steffen 1984, in the U.S.); nowadays, however, it isno longer perceived as incongruent for women. Alternatively,it might be associated with a higher status in men (e.g.,director, manager) and a lower status in women (e.g., secre-tary). Spanish national census data (from 2001) shows thatover 59 % of women hold lower status stereotypical jobs andearn less thanmen (Ibañez-Pascual 2008). Therefore, an officecontext reflects congruent roles for both men and women,although it might still be seen as a predominantly male envi-ronment, while, at the same time, reflecting status inequalityfor both genders in society. We predict that, in this context,traditional gender stereotypes (women-warmth, men-competence) will be activated.

In contrast, a kitchen context is highly associated withwomen and seen as incongruent for men, at least in Spanishsociety where traditional roles continue to be differentiated(Sánchez and Hall 1999), and women are mainly responsiblefor household and caregiving tasks (Álvarez and Miles 2006;Eurostat 2006; Sánchez-Herrero et al. 2009). This genderedrole distribution at home is also maintained among youngergenerations, as shown by research on Spanish adolescentsamples (Silván-Ferrero and Bustillos López 2007). There-fore, the kitchen context entails a low status position forwomen that might be particularly threatening to their identity;at the same time, it represents a context in which women are“in charge”. Thus, women might be particularly motivated toconfront traditional stereotype activation in the kitchen con-text as a way of restoring their positive identity (in line withthe social identity theory, Tajfel and Turner 1979).

Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes are among the first stereotypes to develop,emerging as early as 2 years of age in North Americantoddlers (Hill and Flom 2007). Such culturally-shared stereo-types prescribe specific traits or characteristics for women(e.g., caring, sensitive, emotional) and for men (e.g., dynamic,rational, competent) that differentiate the genders on twodimensions: communality or expressiveness on the one hand,

and agency or instrumentality on the other (in German sam-ples: Abele 2003; and North American samples: Bem 1974;Eagly and Mladinic 1989; Spence and Helmreich 1978; Wil-liams and Best 1990). These dimensions are consistent withthe distinction that the Stereotype Content Model (SCM;Glick and Fiske 1999; Fiske et al. 2002) makes betweencompetence and warmth as the two axes on which we placedifferent groups of people according to their stereotypesacross cultures, including Spain (Cuddy et al. 2009).

It has been shown that these stereotypical associations areactivated implicitly (in Spain—de Lemus et al. 2008; in theU.S.—Wade and Brewer 2006). For instance, previous re-search in Spain has found that at the implicit level, men’s(vs. women’s) faces prime the activation of competence-related traits, whereas women’s faces trigger the activationof warmth traits (de Lemus, et al. 2008). Furthermore, theSCM model proposes that evaluations of competence arerelated to status differences between groups, whereas evalua-tions of warmth are based on interdependence between thegroups (i.e., cooperation, competition). Such interdependencegoals moderate the activation of the traditional pattern ofstereotypes (men-competence; women-warmth) (in Poland—Bukowski et al. 2009; in Spain—de Lemus and Bukowski2013). For instance, in a Spanish sample, de Lemus andBukowski (2013) found that, regardless of participants’ gen-der, competing against a woman on a stereotypically male task(i.e., mathematical abilities task) triggered a reversal of thestereotype activation pattern at the implicit level, i.e., in thecompetition condition, female primes (vs. male primes) facil-itated the activation of competence, whereas male primes (vs.female ones) facilitated the activation of warmth. In the con-trol condition, however, the traditional stereotypes were acti-vated (i.e., men-competence; women-warmth). There is fur-ther evidence for the context-sensitive nature and malleabilityof gender stereotypes and subtypes (in the U.S.: Blair et al.2001; Dasgupta and Asgari 2004; Wade and Brewer 2006;and in Spain—de Lemus et al. 2013; see Lenton et al. 2009 fora review).

In the present research, we extend these previous findingsby examining the influence of status-related social roles on theactivation of such stereotypes at the implicit level. In order totest whether this contextual dependency of gender stereotypesoccurs in a relatively automatic way (i.e., not influencedby controlled processes), we manipulated response-timeconditions and the duration of the exposure to stimuliacross two studies.

The Influence of Social Roles on Gender Stereotypes

Many approaches to stereotyping and prejudice are based onthe plausible assumption that exposure to stereotype-relevantinformation about groups drives our stereotypical beliefs andpromotes prejudice based thereon. Social role theory (SRT; in

Sex Roles

the U.S.: Bosak et al. 2008; Eagly and Steffen 1984) empha-sizes the role of context on determining gender stereotypesand prejudice. SRT proposes that social roles underlie thecontent of stereotypes, such that if men and women occupythe same roles, stereotypical judgements should disappear.Consistent with this approach, research has found that thepresentation of women in counter-stereotypical (leadership)roles or just the mere mental imagery of such examplesreduced automatic gender stereotypical associations in U.S.samples (Blair, et al. 2001; Dasgupta and Asgari 2004).

However, the role congruity theory that was proposed byNorth-American scholars (RCT; Eagly et al. 2000; Eagly andDiekman 2005; Eagly and Karau 2002; Wood and Eagly 2002)refines this approach by acknowledging that undermining prej-udice simply by redistributing the roles may not be so straight-forward because prejudiced evaluations may also reflect theperceived mismatch (i.e., incongruity) between the stereotypi-cal traits associated with a person and the relevant skills asso-ciated with a particular role (e.g., the case of women in leader-ship roles). According to the traditional distribution of socialroles between men and women, there are congruent (e.g.,housewife, career men) and incongruent (e.g., career women;male homemaker) roles. We know that, at least in the case ofwomen, role-incongruent occupations (e.g., leader) promotemore negative social judgments both in U.S. (Eagly andKarau 2002; Rudman 1998) and Spanish (Garcia-Retameroand López-Zafra 2006, 2009; López-Zafra et al. 2009) samples.Nonetheless, we do not know whether the same effect occursfor men performing role-incongruent activities (e.g., homemak-er), though it is theoretically argued that this should also be thecase (Eagly and Diekman 2005).

Consistent with this theory, Rudman and Kilianski (2000)found in the U.S. that when both genders were assigned tohigh status positions, a positive bias towards men (the groupthat was in the role-congruent position) was shown, whereaswhen they were both assigned to low status positions, therewas a tendency to show a positive bias towards women (in thiscase, those performing a role-congruent activity). Further, arecent study in Spain, reminding women about the traditionaldistribution of roles by reinforcing stereotypical versuscounter-stereotypical associations (using an associative learn-ing paradigm), led women to a stereotype reversal (i.e.,women-competence, men-warmth). Furthermore, this stereo-type reversal was predicted by women’s support for affirma-tive action policies to increase female representation in highstatus positions. This outcome was interpreted by the authorsas a motivated tendency to resist traditional stereotypes basedon participants’ endorsement of egalitarian beliefs (de Lemuset al. 2013). The question remains whether women endorsetraditional stereotypes under standard conditions, when nei-ther stereotypes nor counter-stereotypes are enhanced, de-pending on the context in which the social roles are portrayed.What stereotypical associations do women activate when

confronted with paid-work related roles that resemble thegender status difference in society vs. domestic roles wherethe ingroup is stereotypically “in charge”?

Finally, we focus on examining whether such context-dependent stereotype activation occurs in a more (or less)automatic way. To this end, we compare a more cognitivelyrestrictive condition with a less restrictive one, by manipulat-ing the duration of the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA;Neely 1977). Additionally, we manipulate the length of theresponse-time window across two studies in order to furtherrestrict the impact of reflexive (controlled) processing, thusincreasing the chance of obtaining spontaneous responses tothe context-gender associations. Following a gradual ap-proach to automaticity, the activations that occur under themost restrictive time condition are considered to be faster,more efficient, and less controllable (Moors and De Houwer2006). At more controllable levels, women might be able toinhibit stereotype activation, regardless of the context, due toother factors such as social desirability concerns.

Overview of the Hypotheses for Studies 1 and 2

In the office context, we expect to find a traditional activationof gender stereotypes, as this context resembles the stereotyp-ical power distribution in society. Both men and women couldbe seen as congruent in an office context; however, gendercould imply certain status connotations (i.e., in an office, menmight be perceived as having higher status, and women lowerstatus—e.g., secretaries, subordinates). Hence, male primeswill facilitate the categorization of competence, whereas fe-male primes will facilitate the categorization of warmth traits,as found in previous research with similar samples whengender is primed without a background (i.e., de Lemus et al.2008, 2013; de Lemus and Bukowski 2013) (Hypothesis 1).

In contrast, the kitchen context represents the domesticworld, which is occupied mostly bywomen in Spanish societynowadays (e.g., Álvarez and Miles 2006; Eurostat 2006;Sánchez-Herrero et al. 2009). To this end, the kitchen contextreinforces traditional female gender roles, yet, at the sametime, it is in this context where women, paradoxically, arethe ones who take the leading role. Therefore, we expect tofind a significant reduction or even a reversal of the stereotypeactivation pattern in the kitchen context . Consistent with theincongruence of this role context in relation to men (i.e., Eaglyand Diekman 2005), such reversal could occur in the compe-tence dimension, as men might be seen as less capable thanwomen in this role. However, we do not expect women toshow a backlash towards men in terms of warmth, sincedisliking men in low status positions would work againstwomen’s interests as a group. In other words, we predict thatmen (vs. women) might be associated with less competence inthe kitchen context as a result of the perceived role incongru-ence, but not with less warmth than women (Hypothesis 2).

Sex Roles

Finally, we predict that the activation of context-dependentgender stereotypes is a fairly implicit and automatic process;hence, it will be moderated by SOA duration. Thus, thepredicted effects will occur in short SOA conditions in whichit is more difficult to implement controlled processing strate-gies that might be influenced by other motivational factors(e.g., social desirability concerns) (Hypothesis 3).

In summary, we will test the following three hypothesesacross two experimental studies:

Hypothesis 1 Male primes will facilitate the categorization ofcompetence, whereas female primes will facilitate the catego-rization of warmth traits in the office context.

Hypothesis 2 Female primes will facilitate the categorizationof competence, compared to male primes, in the kitchencontext, but not the categorization of warmth traits.

Hypothesis 3 The predicted effects will occur in short SOAconditions.

Before presenting the main studies, we will briefly describea pilot study in which the materials used in both studies werepre-tested.

Pilot Study and Pre-Testing of Materials

Sixty-six female undergraduates from the University of Grana-da responded to several questions regarding the distribution ofwomen (vs. men) in high (i.e., director, chef) and low status(secretary, housewife) occupations related to kitchen and officecontexts. Participants were asked: “Compared to men, whatpercentage of women in Spain do you think occupy the roleof…?” for each of the aforementioned roles, which werepresented in counterbalanced order (i.e., secretary, housewife,director, chef). The results of this pilot showed that participantsestimated that 74 % of Spanish women occupy low statuspositions (housewife, secretary), whereas only 39 % occupyhigh status positions (chef, director), compared to men, F(1,65)=246.14, p <.0001, ηp

2=.80. Moreover, within the lowstatus positions, the percentage of women (vs. men) associatedwith the role of housewife (M =78 %, SD =12.58) was higherthan the percentage of women (vs. men) associated with therole of secretary (M=70 %, SD =13.78), F(1, 65)=15.91, p<.001, ηp

2=.20. These results suggest that, in keeping withgeneral statistics (e.g., Eurostat 2006) and our rationale, youngfemale undergraduates are aware of the higher representation ofwomen in low status jobs. Further, the role of housewife (i.e.,related to the home context) is still more strongly associatedwith women than the role of secretary (i.e., paid job, related tothe office context). We also asked the participants indirectlyabout the perceived status of the office and kitchen

backgrounds used for the studies (“To what extent does thispicture represent the following contexts?”) on a scale from 1(home kitchen/secretary’s office) to 7 (restaurant kitchen/director’s office). Overall, the office context was consistentlyrated as higher in status (M =4.21) than the kitchen context(M =1.49) on a 7-point scale, F (1, 65)=217.87, p <.001,ηp

2=.77. The kitchen was clearly seen as a home kitchen,whereas the office context was not clearly differentiated aseither a director’s or a secretary’s office (no difference fromthe midpoint of the scale, F <1, ns). Altogether, these resultssuggest that the office context is perceived as congruent forwomen as well as for men. On the other hand, the kitchencontext is perceived as congruent for women, but not for men.Finally, the kitchen context is perceived as more stereotypicallyfemale than the office context.

Further, we presented all the images used as primes (fourwomen and four men appearing in the context of a kitchen or anoffice) to a different sample of 72 female undergraduates fromthe same university. We asked participants to rate how proto-typical each one of the pictures was in our society nowadays ona scale from 1 (not at all typical) to 7 (very typical). Pre-testingof the prime stimuli showed that the pictures in which a man(M =6.08, SD =1.02) vs. a woman (M =4.75, SD =1.15)appeared in an office background were seen as currently moreprototypical in society, F(1, 71)=72.70, p <.001, ηp

2=.51. Onthe other hand, women (M=5.56, SD =1.33) vs. men (M=2.89,SD =1.12) were seen as more prototypical when they appearedin a kitchen background, F(1, 71)=146.41, p<.001, ηp

2=.67.These results are in line with the previous findings in the pilotstudy about the representation of women in different roles.Finally, we asked them to rate how much they liked each oneof the pictures on a scale from 1–not at all, to 7–very much.Results showed that they liked the picture of women in an officemore (Moffice=6.27, SD =.94) than the picture of women in thekitchen (Mkitchen=4.23, SD =1.39), F(1, 71)=114.72, p<.001,ηp

2=.62; however, they liked men equally in both contexts(Mkitchen=5.57, SD =1.42; Moffice=5.77, SD=.99), F =1.00,ns. Contrast analyses indicated that they liked women in thekitchen less than a man in the kitchen or a woman in the office(C1), F(1, 71)=91.15, p<.001; and they liked women in thekitchen less than aman either in the kitchen or in the office (C2),F(1, 71)=85.36, p<.001. These results suggest that the kitchencontext is the least preferred by this sample of Spanish femaleundergraduates, in line with our rationale that the kitchen con-text is strongly stereotypical for women, and therefore, the mostidentity-threatening for women as a low status group.

Study 1

The three hypotheses about stereotype activation in the officecontext (Hypothesis 1), stereotype inhibition or reversal in thekitchen context (Hypothesis 2), and automaticity of the effects

Sex Roles

(Hypothesis 3), were first tested in a study in which femaleparticipants had to categorize competence and warmth targetwords as rapidly as possible, after being primed with imagesof men and women appearing in one of the two selectedcontexts (kitchen, office).

Method

Participants

A total of 50 first-year Psychology students (all female; ninemen were excluded) at the University of Granada participatedin this experiment voluntarily in exchange for course creditsfor a social psychology course. Data from four participantswho consistently failed to answer some of the trial questions,one participant who had a high error rate (12 %), and oneparticipant aged 37, were excluded from the analyses, leavingthe data from 44 participants for formal analysis (Age range:18–22 years old; M =18.70; SD =0.99).

Materials

To program the priming task, show the stimulus, and registerthe responses, we used E-prime 1.1 (Schneider et al. 2002).

Target stimuli (in English and Spanish) We used eight com-petence traits, four positive (constancy—constancia ; motiva-tion—motivación ; efficacy—eficacia ; intelligence—inteligencia) and four negative (demotivation—desmotivación;inconstancy—inconstancia ; inefficacy—ineficacia ; intransi-gence—intransigencia); and eight warmth traits, four pos-itive (goodness—bondad ; understanding—comprensión ;sensitivity—sensibilidad ; friendliness—simpatía ) and four

negative (antipathy—antipatía ; hostility—hostilidad ; indis-cretion—indiscreción ; misunderstanding—incomprensión).We added eight filler words, four positive and four negative,which were not related to the gender stereotypes in order tomake the trait-gender connection more subtle and the coverstory more credible. Target words were selected based on theirdifferences in attributed agency/competence and communion/warmth, as well as positivity vs. negativity, from a prior studyusing a similar sample of 149 Psychology students from thesame University (Puertas 2003).

Primes We used pictures of four men and four women with anemotionally neutral face, taken by us for the purpose of thisexperiment, in two different contexts (kitchen and office),similar to those shown in Fig. 1 (colour originals can beprovided upon request).

Procedure

We asked participants to do a categorization task inwhich theyhad to categorize a target word as positive or negative asquickly as possible while trying not to make any mistakes.At the beginning of each trial, a fixation point (“+”) appearedon the middle of the screen for 1,000 ms. The fixation pointwas followed by a prime picture that was presented for 28 msat the same location. The picture was followed by a blankscreen, which was presented for 70 ms (in the short SOAcondition) or 602 ms (in the long SOA condition) until thetarget word appeared. The target word remained in the centreof the screen until the participant gave a response, or for amaximum of 2,000 ms. A visual description of the primingsequence can be seen in Fig. 2. As a cover story, partici-pants were told that the experiment was trying to

Fig. 1 Examples of stimuli used as primes in Studies 1 & 2

Sex Roles

measure automaticity in word perception and judgement;consequently, this process should not be affected byinterfering images.

Design

The experimental design was a 2 (prime gender: malevs. female)×2 (context: kitchen vs. office)×2 (targetdimension: competence vs. warmth)×2 (valence: posi-tive vs. negative)×2 (SOA: short=98 ms vs. long=630 ms) within-subject design. The order of the trialswas fully randomized. The variables of dimension andvalence refer to the nature of the target word; fillertrials were not analysed.

Each target word was presented eight times, preceded bypictures of men and women either in a kitchen or an office;there were 16 observations for each experimental condition.The dependent variable was the reaction time (RT) taken toclassify target words as positive or negative. We were inter-ested in the modulation of gender priming on the trait pro-cessing and wanted to avoid individual differences betweenthe words due to uncontrolled variables (frequency of use,subjective familiarity, etc.). For that purpose, and for the sakeof simplicity in the representation of results in figures,relative-speed scores were computed for each word and par-ticipant by subtracting, for each participant, the average RT toeach word from the corresponding reaction times per experi-mental condition. These relative-speed scores were computedseparately for the two SOA conditions in order to avoidthe usual temporal preparation effect, which showsfaster RTs for long SOAs compared to short SOAs.

Thus, a negative index shows a faster relative RT, anda positive index shows a slower relative RT for eachexperimental condition. Lastly, average relative-speedindexes were computed for each participant and exper-imental condition. Since all factors are repeated mea-sures, the analyses are the same, regardless of whetherwe use raw response times or facilitation scores.

Results and Discussion

Trials with incorrect responses (2 %) and no response (0.2 %)were eliminated from the analyses. Trials with reaction timesfaster than 200 ms, or greater than 1,500 ms were likewisediscarded, being considered as anticipations and lack of con-centration respectively; thus, a further 0.7 % of the trials werediscarded. A 2 (prime gender)×2 (context)×2 (target dimen-sion)×2 (valence)×2 (SOA) repeated measures ANOVAwasconducted. In order to test our hypotheses regarding thecontextual moderation of stereotype activation (Hypoth-eses 1 & 2), we were interested in the interaction Primegender x Target dimension and whether it was moder-ated by context. In order to test our Hypothesis 3,regarding the automaticity of these effects, we wereinterested in the moderation by SOA, i.e., Prime genderx Target dimension x Context x SOA.

There was a significant interaction of Prime gender xTarget dimension, F(1, 43)=4.17, p =.047, ηp

2=.09, indicat-ing a tendency to evaluate competence words faster when theywere primed with a male picture compared to a female picture,F(1, 43)=3.83, p =.056. The reverse effect was not significantfor warmth traits, F <1, ns.

+1000 ms

Fixation

Prime28 ms

70/602 ms

Intelligence

Target

TIME

SOA

Until response is given or 2000 ms max.

Fig. 2 Priming sequence forStudy 1

Sex Roles

Further, there was a significant four-way interaction Primegender x Context x Target dimension x Valence, F(1, 43)=9.98, p =.003, ηp

2=.19, as shown in Fig. 3, that allowed us totest Hypothesis 1 and 2 regarding the contextual modulationof the stereotype activation.

The interaction Prime gender x Target dimension x Contextwas significant for positive traits, F (1, 43)=5.88, p =.02,ηp

2=.12, and for negative traits, F (1, 43)=4.46, p =.04,ηp

2=.09. To analyse these interactions, we looked separatelyat the Prime gender x Target dimension interaction for the fourcombinations of context and valence conditions.

We found that the Prime gender x Target dimension inter-action was significant for positive words in the office context,F(1, 43)=8.76, p =.005, ηp

2=.17, but not for negative words,F <1, ns. In the office context, participants were categorizingpositive warmth traits faster when they were primed withpictures of women compared to men, F (1, 43)=5.98,p =.02, ηp

2=.12, whereas no effects were found on compe-tence traits, F <1.5, ns.

The interaction Prime gender x Target dimension wasmarginally significant for negative words in the kitchencontext, F (1, 43)=3.67, p =.06, ηp

2=.08, but not forpositive words, F <1, ns. Participants were categorizingnegative competence-related words faster when theywere primed with pictures of men in a kitchen, com-pared to women, F (1, 43)=5.71, p =.02, ηp

2=.12. Nodifferences appeared for negative warmth traits in thekitchen context, F <1, ns.

In summary, results partly support our hypotheses, show-ing an activation of gender stereotypes in the office context(Hypothesis 1), and a role-incongruity backlash effect for menin the kitchen context (Hypothesis 2). However, these effectswere not moderated by the SOA factor, F <1; therefore, wehave no clear evidence for the contextual moderation ofgender-stereotype activation occurring in an automatic way,at least relative to our long SOA condition (Hypothesis 3).Despite this lack of effect, visual exploration of the datashows that the described effects are greater in the shortSOA condition.

Study 2

In order to replicate the results found and to further explore thecontextual modulation on automatic activation of stereotypes,we ran a second study. Again, we tested Hypothesis 1 regard-ing the activation of traditional stereotypes in the office con-text, and Hypothesis 2 regarding the inhibition of such stereo-types, or even confrontation, on the competence dimension inthe women-related context (kitchen). Additionally, to testwhether these effects occurred at a more automatic level, asproposed in our Hypothesis 3, besides manipulating the SOAas in Study 1, we restricted the response conditions further bylimiting the time participants had to categorize the target wordto 1,000 ms (instead of to 2,000 ms, as was the case in Study1). Also, filler trials were removed to reduce the total durationof the study.

Method

Participants

A total of 53 first-year Psychology students (all females; twomales were excluded) from the University of Granada volun-tarily participated in this study in exchange for course creditsfor a social psychology course. Data from four participantswho consistently did not answer some of the trials, and fromtwo participants who had a high error rate (17 % and 19 %),were excluded from the analyses, leaving data from 47 par-ticipants for formal analysis (Age range: 18–22 years old;M =18.69; SD =0.96).

Materials and Procedure

The materials used in Study 2 were the same as those used inStudy 1, excluding the eight non-related words previouslyused as fillers.

The task and the priming sequence were the same as inStudy 1, the main difference being that the target wordappeared on the screen for only 100 ms, followed by a blank

*Fig. 3 Relative speed scores inStudy 1 for the interaction ofPrime gender×Targetdimension×Valence×Context.Lower indexes indicate fasterRTs, and stronger activation ofthose traits in each condition

Sex Roles

screen that was presented until a response was given by theparticipants or for a time limit of 900 ms. Therefore, partici-pants had a maximum of 1,000 ms to categorize the word.

Design

We used the same design as in Study 1: 2 (prime gender: malevs. female)×2 (context: kitchen vs. office)×2 (target dimen-sion: competence vs. warmth)×2 (valence: positive vs. nega-tive)×2 (SOA: short=98 ms vs. long=630 ms) within-subjectdesign. Here again, relative-speed scores were calculated foreach experimental condition.

Results and Discussion

As in Study 1, trials with incorrect responses (4.67 %) or noresponse (1.2 %) were eliminated from the analyses. Trialswith RT faster than 200 ms were equally discarded, beingconsidered anticipations, which meant that an additional0.13 % of the trials were discarded.

Relative-speed scores were analysed by means of a 2(prime gender)×2 (context)×2 (target dimension)×2(valence)×2 (SOA) repeated measures ANOVA.

In this case, there was a significant five-way interactionPrime gender x Context x Target dimension x Valence x SOA,F(1, 46)=7.06, p =.01, ηp

2=.13, allowing us to test for ourhypotheses 1 and 2 in the different SOA conditions. Aspredicted in Hypothesis 3, the interaction Prime gender xContext x Target dimension x Valence was only significantin the short SOA condition, F (1, 46)=7.60, p =.008, ηp

2=.14,whereas there were no effects in the long SOA condition, F <1, ns. Therefore, we conducted the analyses in the short SOAcondition as shown in Fig. 4.

In the short SOA condition, the interaction Prime gender xTarget dimension x Context, F (1, 46)=8.36, p =.006,ηp

2=.15, was significant for positive traits. Hence, we ana-lyzed the responses for positive traits in the two contextsseparately. The interaction Prime gender x Target dimensionwas significant for positive traits in the office context, F (1,

46)=13.55, p <.001, ηp2=.23, showing a priming effect such

that participants categorized competence-related words fasterwhen they were primed with a man compared to a woman,F(1, 46)=9.00, p =.004, ηp

2=.16, whereas they categorizedwarmth-related words faster when they were primed with awoman compared to a man, F(1, 46)=4.24, p =.04, ηp

2=.08.There was no significant Prime gender x Target dimensioninteraction in the kitchen context, F<1, ns. These resultsreplicate and extend the results of Study 1, confirming Hy-pothesis 1 in the office context and showing automatic acti-vation of traditional gender stereotypes in the office, but onlyfor positive traits.

The interaction Prime gender x Target dimension x Contextwas not significant for negative traits, F <1, ns. However, inorder to test whether our Hypothesis 2 was replicated in Study2, we analyzed the specific predictions about competence andwarmth in the kitchen context. Replicating the results of Study1 (Hypothesis 2), we found the same tendency to react fasterto negative competence traits when participants were primedwith men compared to women in the kitchen context, F (1,46)=3.94, p =.05, ηp

2=.08. No differences appeared onwarmth when comparing male and female primes, F <1, ns.

To summarize, when automatic processing is enhanced inStudy 2, we find that context moderates the activation ofgender stereotypes in the short SOA condition, providingsupport for our Hypothesis 3. In an occupational context(office), participants activate the traditional gender stereotype(men–high competence; women–high warmth), although theydo not activate this pattern in the long SOA condition (tendingrather to reverse this effect). Hypotheses 1 and 2 were alsosupported in our second study.

General Discussion

The main goal of this research was to examine the effects ofcontext (social roles) in the automatic evaluation of genderstereotypical traits by women. The current investigation pro-vides three main conclusions that shed some light on our main

* * †Fig. 4 Relative speed scores inStudy 2 for the interaction ofPrime gender×Targetdimension×Valence×Context inthe short SOA condition. Lowerindexes indicate faster RTs, andstronger activation of those traitsin each condition

Sex Roles

research questions: a) The stereotyping priming effect (Primegender x Target dimension) found in both studies is moderatedby the context in which the target person appears, showing anactivation of traditional gender stereotypes (men–competence,women–warmth) in the context of an office, but not in thecontext of a kitchen (Studies 1 & 2); b) In a kitchen context,traditional gender stereotypes are not activated; rather, menactivate negative competence in this type of role-incongruentcontext (Studies 1 & 2); c). This effect occurs in a relativelyautomatic way in the most restrictive condition (Study 2).

The traditional gender stereotypes are activated (men–highin competence, women–high in warmth) in an office context,which is consistent with previous research conducted in theU.S. (Eagly et al. 2000; Eckes 2002). This context seems toreproduce the general distribution of power and status insociety that favours men (who are seen as more competent,although less warm) over women (who are seen as warmer,but less competent). In line with the results found in the pilotstudy and pre-testing of the images used for this research,some of the information collected during the debriefing ses-sion supports this argument: when participants were asked todescribe what images they had seen during the experiment,some of them referred to different gender subtypes in the samecontext such as “secretarias” (i.e., female secretaries) or“directores” (i.e., male managers) and “abogados” (i.e., malelawyers). Therefore, a man in an office context is more likelyto be seen as holding positions of authority such as “business-man”, “manager”, or “lawyer”, and is therefore associatedwith high status and competence. In contrast, a woman inthe same context is seen as holding low status positions suchas “secretary” or “employee”, thus being more associated withwarmth, which is consistent with findings across cultures(Cuddy et al. 2009). This subtyping explanation needs to befurther examined in future research.

The stereotyping effect found in the office context (but not inthe kitchen) replicates previous research on Spanish samples(de Lemus, et al. 2008; de Lemus and Bukowski 2013), show-ing automatic activation of the stereotypical dimensions ofwarmth and competence. This effect appears under cognitivelyrestrictive conditions (SOA of 98 ms) in which controlledprocessing is difficult to implement, and the effect disappearswhen a longer SOA (630 ms) is used. This suggests that theinfluence of context on stereotype activation is a fairly auto-matic effect (in terms of processing speed). When participantshave more time to use some controlled processes, the effectdisappears or even tends to reverse in some conditions. Theseresults suggest that women activate culturally-shared knowl-edge of stereotypes in quite automatic ways. However, theyinhibit stereotype activation as soon as controlled processing ispossible. This is perhaps not surprising, sincewomen as a grouphave a vested interest in not perceiving their group in a stereo-typed way, especially in status-defining roles. This result isconsistent with previous literature on malleability of automatic

stereotypes and prejudice activation (cf., reviews by Blair 2002;Bosak and Diekman 2010).

Further, the moderating effect of social roles showed thatwomen activate more negative competence traits after beingpresented with a male prime in an incongruent role (i.e.,kitchen). This result could be seen as a negative bias consis-tent with role-congruity theory predictions (Eagly and Karau2002; Wood and Eagly 2002). The lack of fit between themale stereotype and the social role of homemaker leads to anegative evaluation of the target outgroup. This result isconsistent with previous research that has shown facilitationof negative responses after being exposed to incongruentpriming pairs (Klauer and Musch 2003). The observed effectmight also be viewed as a backlash towards men and could beinterpreted in two different ways. On the one hand, one couldargue that it is a way of reinforcing traditional roles andstereotypes, by resisting social change in role distributions.However, in more basic terms of group identity, it couldsimply reflect a motivated ingroup bias to protect and affirmtheir (otherwise disadvantaged) ingroup identity as women.The fact that the bias occurs only for competence traits (i.e.,men–negative competence), but not for warmth, supports thismotivational interpretation. Competence is the dimension onwhich the status difference between men and women is an-chored (Ridgeway 2001); accordingly, challenging the tradi-tional men-competent stereotype on this dimension might beparticularly important for women’s goals. Further, there is nobacklash on the warmth dimension, suggesting that presentingmen in the kitchen is not activating negative interdependencebetween the groups. Therefore, it is not a diffused negativityeffect towards men that do not conform to societal roles, but aspecific way of challenging the status-defining dimension ofgender stereotypes (i.e., competence). This interpretation isconsistent with recent findings of implicit resistance to genderstereotypes after being extensively exposed to traditional gen-der roles, an effect that is predicted by women’s egalitariangoals (de Lemus et al. 2013).

Nevertheless, our research presents several limitations thatwould need to be resolved in future studies. First, we havefocused solely on the perspective of female Spanish students.In future studies, it would be worthwhile examining thesepredictions with a male sample. Men presumably have differ-ent social interests (e.g., holding the high status position) thatmight reinforce the strength of the activation of traditionalstereotypes in the office context, even in the less restrictiveresponse conditions (long SOA). Second, the subtyping ex-planation of our findings needs to be further examined. Asdiscussed above, we are aware of the fact that the man-officeand the woman-office pairs could be differently interpreted ashigh or low in status respectively. This needs to be measuredmore directly in future research. Further, the man-kitchen andthe woman-kitchen pairs could also potentially be interpreteddifferently in terms of status (e.g., the man could be seen as a

Sex Roles

chef—high status, whereas the woman is seen as a house-wife—low status). We know that this is not the case with theset of stimuli currently being used (as the pre-test datashows), but it might be interesting to further explorethis idea in future research.

In conclusion, the interaction between gender and contextguides social perception and judgement from a very earlystage of processing, supporting Blair’s argument regardingmalleability of the automatic activation of stereotypes andprejudice (2002). The contextual moderation effects we havefound can reinforce stereotypes (and) prejudice at one level,since the influence of the context is strongly determined by atraditional distribution of roles, and the gender stereotypicalassociations of warmth and competence are still activated inan occupational context (office). Nevertheless, the effectsfound could be paradoxically interpreted in more optimisticways at another level, suggesting that gender stereotypes donot apply in certain (albeit traditional) contexts, in whichwomen are able to challenge the traditional men-competentstereotype.

Acknowledgements This research was supported by Grants No.PSI2010-15139 from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation(Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación) and No. SEJ2010-6225 from theAndalusian Regional Government (Junta de Andalucía). The authorswould like to thank Russell Spears and Wolfgang Stroebe, as well asthe editors and blind reviewers, for their helpful comments to previousversions of this article.

References

Abele, A. E. (2003). The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 85 , 768–776. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.768.

Álvarez, B., &Miles, D. (2006). Husbands’ housework time: Does wivespaid employment make a difference? Investigaciones Economicas,30 , 5–31. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.fundacionsepi.es/InvEcon/paperArchive/Ene2006/v30i1a1.pdf.

Barreto,M., Ryan,M., & Schmitt, M. (2009). The glass ceiling in the 21stcentury: Understanding barriers to gender equality. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Jour-nal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 42 , 155–162. doi:10.1037/h0036215.

Blair, I. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6 , 242–261. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0603_8.

Blair, I. V., Ma, J. E., & Lenton, A. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypesaway: The moderation of automatic stereotypes through mentalimagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 , 828–841. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.828.

Bosak, J., & Diekman, A. (2010). Malleability of intergroup stereotypesand attitudes [Editorial]. Social Psychology, 41 , 111–112. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000016.

Bosak, J., Sczesny, S., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Communion and agencyjudgments of women and men as a function of role information andresponse format. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38 , 1148–1155. doi:10.1002/ejsp.538.

Bukowski, M., Moya, M., de Lemus, S., & Szmajke, A. (2009). Selectivestereotype activation: The joint impact of interpersonal goals andtask context. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 317–324.doi:10.1002/ejsp.585.

Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S. Y., Glick, P., Demoulin, S.,Leyens, J. Ph., … Ziegler, R. (2009). Stereotype content modelacross cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences.British Journal of Social Psychology, 48 , 1–33. doi:10.1348/014466608X314935.

Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposureto counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on themalleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology, 40 , 642–658. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003.

de Lemus, S., & Bukowski, M. (2013). When interdependence shapessocial perception: Cooperation and competition moderate the im-plicit activation of gender stereotypical associations. The SpanishJournal of Psychology, 16 .

de Lemus, S., Moya, M., Bukowski, M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2008).Activación automática de las dimensiones de competencia ysociabilidad en el caso de los estereotipos de género (Automaticactivation of competence and warmth dimensions in the case ofgender stereotyping). Psicológica, 29 , 115–132. Retrieved fromhttp://www.uv.es/psicologica/articulos2.08/1LEMUS.pdf.

de Lemus, S., Spears, R., Bukowski, M., Moya, M., & Lupiáñez, J.(2013b). Reversing implicit gender stereotypes as a function ofexposure to traditionalrole relations. Social Psychology, 44, 109–117. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000140.

Eagly, A. H., & Diekman, A. B. (2005). What is the problem? Prejudiceas an attitude-in-context. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. Rudman(Eds.), On the nature of prejudice. Fifty years after Allport (pp. 19–35). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudicetoward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109 , 573–598. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.109.3.573.

Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudestoward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle-tin, 15, 543–558. doi:10.1177/0146167289154008.

Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from thedistribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Person-ality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.46.4.735.

Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory ofsex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes &H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology ofgender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testingpredictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47, 99–114. doi:10.1023/A:1021020920715.

Eurostat. (2006). 8 March 2006: International women’s day. A statisticalview of the life of women and men in the EU25. Retrieved fromhttp://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=STAT/06/29&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=e.

Fiske, S., Cuddy, A., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed)stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively followfrom perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of socialcognition: warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,11 , 277–283. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005.

Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against wom-en in male-congenial environments: Perceptions of gender rolecongruity in leadership. Sex Roles, 55 , 51–61. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9068-1.

Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2009). Causal attributions aboutfeminine and leadership roles: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal

Sex Roles

of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40 , 492–509. doi:10.1177/0022022108330991.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). Sexism and other isms. Independence,status, and the ambivalent content of stereotypes. InW. B. Swann Jr.,J. H. Langlois, & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes inmodern society. The gender science of Janet Taylor Spence (pp.193–222). Washington: American Psychological Association.

Hill, S. E., & Flom, R. (2007). 18- & 24-month-olds’ discrimination ofgender-consistentand inconsistent activities. Infant Behavior andDevelopment, 30, 168–173. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.08.003.

Ibañez-Pascual,M. (2008). La segregación ocupacional por sexo a examen.Características personales, de los puestos y de las empresas asociadasa las ocupaciones masculinas y femeninas. [Sex segregation of occu-pations under examination. Individual, job and business characteris-tics associated with male and female occupations]. Revistas Españolade Investigaciones Sociológicas, 123 , 87–122. Retrieved from http://www.reis.cis.es/REIS/PDF/REIS_123_041215167193739.pdf.

Klauer, K. C., & Musch, J. (2003). Affective priming: Findings andtheories. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology ofevaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 371–391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kulich, C., Trojanowski, G., Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., & Renneboog,L. D. R. (2011). Who gets the carrot and who gets the stick?Evidence of gender disparities in executive remuneration. StrategicManagement Journal, 32 , 301–321. doi:10.1002/smj.878.

Lenton, A. P., Bruder, M., & Sedikides, C. (2009). Ameta-analysis on themalleability of automatic gender stereotypes. Psychology of WomenQuarterly, 33, 183–196. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01488.x.

López-Zafra, E., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Eagly, A. H. (2009).Congruencia de rol de género y aspiraciones de las mujeres aposiciones de liderazgo [Gender congruity and women’s aspirationsin leadership roles]. Revista de Psicología Social, 24, 99–108. doi:10.1174/021347409786923005.

Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automaticity: A theoretical andconceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132 , 297–326. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.297.

Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory:Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacityattention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106 ,226–254. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.106.3.226.

Operario, D., Goodwin, S. A., & Fiske, S. T. (1998). Power is every-where: Social control and personal control both operate as stereo-type activation, interpretation, and response. In R. S. Wyer (Ed.),Advances in social cognition (Vol. 11, pp. 163–176). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.

Puertas, S. (2003). Activación automática de los estereotipos asociados alpoder y su medición implícita y explícita [Automatic activation ofstereotypes associated to power measured implicit and explicitly].Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Granada.

Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). The emergence of status beliefs: From structuralinequality to legitimizing ideology. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.),The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology,justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 257–277). New York: Cam-bridge University Press.

Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: Thecosts and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 , 629–645. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.74.3.629.

Rudman, L. A., & Kilianski, S. E. (2000). Implicit and explicit attitudestoward female authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle-tin, 26, 1315–1328. doi:10.1177/0146167200263001.

Sánchez, L., & Hall, C. S. (1999). Traditional values and democraticimpulses: The gender division of labor in contemporary Spain.Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 30, 659–685.

Sánchez-Herrero Arbide, S., Sánchez-López, M. P., & Dresch, V. (2009).Hombres y trabajo doméstico: Variables demográficas, salud ysatisfacción [Men and house—work: Demographic variables, healthand satisfaction]. Anales de Psicología, 25 , 299–307. Retrievedfrom http://revistas.um.es/analesps/article/view/87681/84451.

Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user’sguide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.

Silván-Ferrero, M. P., & Bustillos López, A. (2007). Benevolent sexismtoward men and women: Justification of the traditional system andconventional gender roles in Spain. Sex Roles, 57 , 607–614. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9271-8.

Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity:Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents . Aus-tin: University of Texas Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroupconflict. In W. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The psychology ofintergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Wade,M. L., & Brewer, M. B. (2006). The structure of female subgroups:An exploration of ambivalent stereotypes. Sex Roles, 45, 753–765.doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9043-x.

Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990).Measuring sex stereotypes: A multi-nation study. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of thebehavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sexdifferences. Psychological Bulletin, 128 , 699–727. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.5.699.

Sex Roles