Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:52:33.484Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Objectified and Dehumanized: Does Objectification Impact Perceptions of Women Political Candidates?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2022

Claire M. Gothreau Open the ORCID record for Claire M. Gothreau [Opens in a new window] ,
Amanda Milena Alvarez  and
Amanda Friesen Open the ORCID record for Amanda Friesen [Opens in a new window]
Claire M. Gothreau*
Affiliation:
Center for the Experimental-Philosophical Study of Discrimination, Aarhus University, Denmark
Amanda Milena Alvarez
Affiliation:
Temple University, Philadelphia, PA
Amanda Friesen
Affiliation:
Western University, London, ON, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. Email: cgothreau@ps.au.dk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectification and dehumanization are topics often discussed within the social psychology and feminist theory literature. Research on objectification has largely focused on the sexual objectification of women’s bodies, whereas the dehumanization literature has focused on dehumanization in the context of racial and ethnic groups. Extant political science research has only recently begun to engage with these concepts. In this manuscript, we build upon these literatures and apply these insights to questions relevant to politics. In particular, we argue that objectifying and dehumanizing portrayals of women impact how voters evaluate women politicians and how much they support gender parity in politics. Through a proposed experimental design, we test our hypothesis that the objectification of women as a group can decrease positive evaluations and likelihood of electoral support for women political candidates.

Keywords

Objectificationdehumanizationgender and politics
Type
Preregistered Report
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , Summer 2023 , pp. 174 - 187
Open Practices
Open data Open materials Preregistered
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This article has earned badges for transparent research practices: Open Data, Open Materials, and Preregistered. For details see the Data Availability Statement.

References

Andrighetto, L., Baldissarri, C., Lattanzio, S., Loughnan, S. and Volpato, C. 2014. Humanitarian Aid? Two Forms of Dehumanization and Willingness to Help After Natural Disasters. British Journal of Social Psychology 53(3): 573–84.10.1111/bjso.12066CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aubrey, J. S., Hopper, K. M. and Mbure, W. G. 2011. Check That Body! The Effects of Sexually Objectifying Music Videos on College Men’s Sexual Beliefs. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 55(3): 360–79.10.1080/08838151.2011.597469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, A. 2001. On the Relationship between Technique and Dehumanization. In Advancing Technology Caring, and Nursing, eds. Locsin, R. C. Westport, CT: Auburn House, 96–105.Google Scholar
Bartky, S. L. 1990. Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bernard, P., Gervais, S. J., Allen, J., Campomizzi, S. and Klein, O. 2012. Integrating Sexual Objectification with Object Versus Person Recognition: The Sexualized-Body-Inversion Hypothesis. Psychological Science 23(5): 469–471.10.1177/0956797611434748CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bittner, A. and Goodyear-Grant, E. 2017. Sex Isn’t Gender: Reforming Concepts and Measurements in the Study of Public Opinion. Political Behavior 39: 1019–41.10.1007/s11109-017-9391-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, M. M. and Lang, P. J. 2007. The International Affective Picture System (IAPS) in the Study of Emotion and Attention. In Series in Affective Science. Handbook of Emotion Elicitation and Assessment, eds. Coan, A. and Allen, J. J. B. New York: Oxford University Press, 29–46.Google Scholar
Bruneau, E., Jacoby, N., Kteily, N. and Saxe, R. 2018. Denying Humanity: The Distinct Neural Correlates of Blatant Dehumanization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 147(7): 1078–93.10.1037/xge0000417CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calogero, R. M., Tylka, T. L., Donnelly, L. C., McGetrick, A. and Leger, A. M. 2017. Trappings of Femininity: A Test of the “Beauty as Currency” Hypothesis in Shaping College Women’s Gender Activism. Body Image 21: 66–70.10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.02.008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlin, D. B. and Winfrey, K. L. 2009. Have You Come a Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage. Communication Studies 60(4): 326–43.10.1080/10510970903109904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, E. C. 2019. Partisan Dehumanization in American Politics. Political Behavior. 43(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09545-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, E. 2020. Dehumanization of the Opposition in Political Campaigns. Social Science Quarterly 101(1): 107–20.10.1111/ssqu.12745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalk, F. and Jonassohn, K. 1990. The History and Sociology of Genocide: Analyses and Case Studies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Cikara, M., Eberhardt, J. L. and Fiske, S. T. 2011. From Agents to Objects: Sexist Attitudes and Neural Responses to Sexualized Targets. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 23(3): 540–51.10.1162/jocn.2010.21497CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ditonto, T. M., Hamilton, A. J. and Redlawsk, D. P. 2014. Gender Stereotypes, Information Search, and Voting Behavior in Political Campaigns. Political Behavior 36(2): 335–58.10.1007/s11109-013-9232-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittmar, Kelly. 2019. Unfinished Business: Women Running in 2018 and Beyond. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Ellemers, N. 2017. Morality and the Regulation of Social Behavior: Groups as Moral Anchors. New York: Psychology Press.10.4324/9781315661322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feltman, C. and Szymanski, D. 2018. Instagram Use and Self-Objectification: The Roles of Internalization, Comparison, Appearance Commentary, and Feminism. Sex Roles 78(5): 311–24.10.1007/s11199-017-0796-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiske, S. T. 2009. From Dehumanization to Objectification to Rehumanization: Neuroimaging Studies on the Building Blocks of Empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1167: 31–4.10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04544.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fredrickson, B. L. and Roberts, T.-A. 1997. Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding Women’s Lived Experiences and Mental Health Risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly 21(2): 173–206.10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friesen, A., Smith, K. B. and Hibbing, J. R. 2017. Physiological Arousal and Self-Reported Valence for Erotic Images Correlate with Sexual Policy Preferences. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 29(3): 449–70.Google Scholar
Funk, M. and Coker, C. 2016. She’s Hot for a Politician: The Impact of Objectifying Commentary on Perceived Credibility of Female Candidates. Communication Studies 67(4): 455–73.10.1080/10510974.2016.1196380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galdi, S., Maass, A. and Cadinu, M. 2014. Objectifying Media: Their Effect on Gender Role Norms and Sexual Harassment of Women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 38(3): 398–413.10.1177/0361684313515185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gapinski, K. D., Brownell, K. D. and LaFrance, M. 2003. Body Objectification and Fat Talk: Effects on Emotion, Motivation, and Cognitive Performance. Sex Roles 48(9–10): 377–88.10.1023/A:1023516209973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gothreau, C., Alvarez, A. M. and Friesen, A. 2022. Replication Data for: Objectified and Dehumanized: Does Objectification Impact Perceptions of Women Political Candidates? Harvard Dataverse, V3. doi: 10.7910/DVN/BZAW8R CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gothreau, C. M. 2021. Sex Objects: How Self-Objectification Undermines Political Efficacy and Engagement. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy 42(4): 275–96.10.1080/1554477X.2021.1941630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, N. 2006. Dehumanization: An Integrative Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review 10(3): 252–64.10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haslam, N., Bain, P., Douge, L., Lee, M. and Bastian, B. 2005. More Human than You: Attributing Humanness to Self and Others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89(6): 937–50.10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.937CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., Kashima, Y., and Bain, P. 2008. Attributing and Denying Humanness to Others. European Review of Social Psychology 19: 55–85.10.1080/10463280801981645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, N. and Stratemeyer, M. 2016. Recent Research on Dehumanization. Current Opinion in Psychology 11: 25–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heflick, N. A. and Goldenberg, J. L. 2009. Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence That Objectification Causes Women to Be Perceived as Less Competent and Less Fully Human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45(3): 598–601.10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heflick, N. A. and Goldenberg, J. L. 2014. Seeing Eye to Body: The Literal Objectification of Women. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23(3): 225–9.10.1177/0963721414531599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heflick, N. A., Goldenberg, J. L., Cooper, D. P. and Puvia, E. 2011. From Women to Objects: Appearance Focus, Target Gender, and Perceptions of Warmth, Morality and Competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 47(3): 572–81.10.1016/j.jesp.2010.12.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heldman, C. 2012. Sexual Objectification Part 1: What Is It? Ms. Magazine. Retrieved from https://msmagazine.com/2012/07/03/sexual-objectification-part-1-what-is-it/ Google Scholar
Hlavac, M. 2018. Stargazer: Well-Formatted Regression and Summary Statistics Tables. Bratislava: Central European Labour Studies Institute.Google Scholar
Kalla, J. and Broockman, D. 2018. The Minimal Persuasive Effects of Campaign Contact in General Elections: Evidence from 49 Field Experiments. American Political Science Review 112(1): 148–66.10.1017/S0003055417000363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krassas, N. R., Blauwkamp, J. M. and Wesselink, P. 2001. Boxing Helena and Corseting Eunice: Sexual Rhetoric in Cosmopolitan and Playboy Magazines. Sex Roles 44: 751–71.10.1023/A:1012254515434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanis, K. and Covell, K. 1995. Images of Women in Advertisements: Effects on Attitudes Related to Sexual Aggression. Sex Roles 32(9–10): 639–49.10.1007/BF01544216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyens, J. P., Cortes, B. P., Demoulin, S., Dovidio, J. F., Fiske, S. T., Gaunt, R., Paladino, M. P. , Rodriguez-Perez, A., Rodriguez-Torres, R., and Vaes, J. 2003. Emotional Prejudice, Essentialism, and Nationalism The 2002 Tajfel Lecture. European Journal of Social Psychology 33(6): 704–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.170 Google Scholar
Leyens, J. P., Rodriguez, A., Rodriguez-Torres, R., Gaunt, R., Paladino, M. P., Vaes, J. and Demoulin, S.  2001. Psychological Essentialism and the Attribution of Uniquely Human Emotions to Ingroups and Outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology 31(4): 395–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.50 2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loughnan, S., Haslam, N. and Kashima, Y. 2009. Understanding the Relationship between Attribute-Based and Metaphor-Based Dehumanization. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 12(6): 747–62.10.1177/1368430209347726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, C. 1987. Feminism Unmodified: Discourses on Life and Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDermott, R., Tingley, D. and Hatemi, P. K. 2014. Assortative Mating on Ideology Could Operate Through Olfactory Cues”. American Journal of Political Science 58(4): 997–1005.10.1111/ajps.12133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, A. and Matson, F. 1983. The Dehumanization of Man. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Moradi, B. and Huang, Y. 2008. Objectification Theory and Psychology of Women: A Decade of Advances and Future Directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly 32(4): 377–98.10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00452.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, K. L., Goldenberg, J. and Boyd, P. 2018. Women as Animals, Women as Objects: Evidence for Two Forms of Objectification. Journal of Personality 88(2): 161–73.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 1995. Objectification. Philosophy and Public Affairs 24(4): 249–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, G. V. 1999. Protecting the Social Body: Use of the Organism Metaphor in Fighting the “Menace of the Feebleminded.” Mental Retardation 37: 188–200.Google Scholar
Quinn, D. M., Kallen, R. W., Twenge, J. M. and Fredrickson, B. L. 2006. The Disruptive Effect of Self-Objectification on Performance. Psychology of Women Quarterly 30(1): 59–64.10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00262.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, M. C. and Bos, A. L. 2014. Measuring Stereotypes of Female Politicians. Political Psychology 35(2): 245–66.10.1111/pops.12040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stankiewicz, J. M. and Rosselli, F. 2008. Women as Sex Objects and Victims in Print Advertisements. Sex Roles 58(7–8): 579–89.10.1007/s11199-007-9359-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utych, S. M. 2022. Race, Dehumanization, and the NFL National Anthem Protests. Journal of Experimental Political Science 9(1): 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2020.33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utych, S. M. 2018. How Dehumanization Influences Attitudes Toward Immigrants. Political Research Quarterly 71(2): 440–52.10.1177/1065912917744897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaes, J., Paladino, P. and Puvia, E. 2011. Are Sexualized Women Complete Human Beings? Why Men and Women Dehumanize Sexually Objectified Women. European Journal of Social Psychology 41(6): 774–85.10.1002/ejsp.824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viki, G. T., Osgood, D. and Phillips, S. 2013. Dehumanization and Self-Reported Proclivity to Torture Prisoners of War. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49(3): 325–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wangnerud, L., Solevid, M. and Djerf-Pierre, M. 2018. Moving Beyond Categorical Gender in Studies of Risk Aversion and Anxiety. Politics and Gender 15(4): 826–50.10.1017/S1743923X18000648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, P. J. and Tokunaga, R. S. 2016. Men’s Objectifying Media Consumption, Objectification of Women, and Attitudes Supportive of Violence against Women. Archives of Sexual Behavior 45(4): 955–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, I. M. 1980. Throwing Like a Girl: A Phenomenology of Feminine Body Comportment Motility and Spatiality. Human Studies 3(1): 137–56.10.1007/BF02331805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Gothreau et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/BZAW8R
Link
Supplementary material: File

Gothreau et al. supplementary material

Gothreau et al. supplementary material

Download Gothreau et al. supplementary material(File)
File 6 MB