Material and methods
To analyze stereotypes out of subgroups of females and you will guys, we basic held an effective pilot studies so you’re able to secure a list of latest gender subgroups for the Norwegian society.
Pilot Study
Members (Letter = 60) was contacted in public places around center out of Bergen, Norway, and you can questioned to engage in a preliminary questionnaire on which organizations they feel that ladies and people into the society was divided directly into. Among the users, fifty.0% was basically women. A good forty-eight.3% was basically men (you to fellow member did not answer comprehensively the question about gender/intercourse 2 ) plus the mean many years try (SD = , diversity 18–79). Almost all (90.0%) didn’t have a keen immigrant history. The remainder got either immigrated on their own (6.7%) otherwise was in fact Norwegian created to 1 otherwise a couple of immigrant moms and dads (step 1.7%). That participant failed to answer the backdrop concern.
The fresh classes to your members was due to the fact: ‘There are many “types” of women in the current community. Delight write down as numerous different varieties of people (e.grams., parents from young kids, businesswomen) as you possibly can think about.’ Other page is actually leftover empty to the participant to write with the. Toward a special page, an equivalent instruction speaing frankly about brand of men is actually presented. The transaction of presentation is actually counterbalanced making sure that 50 % of the participants listed girls earliest, one other 1 / 2 of detailed boys very first.
Normally, the players indexed 7.28 different types of lady (SD = cuatro.07, variety 0–21) and you will 7.42 different varieties of boys (SD = 4.47, hitwe variety 0–24). Three conditions was indeed used to decide which teams will be chose given that stimulus organizations however data: (a) the team had to be mentioned because of the at the least four players, (b) we looked for to own teams from additional social roles and categories (age.grams., teams defined of the family unit members and professional jobs and you may sexual orientations), and you will (c) we wished to make sure that we’d synchronous male and female subgroups (elizabeth.g., male political leaders and you will girls political figures, unmarried parents, and you will single fathers) to help you assists comparisons men and women consuming the same social part and you will class. Our possibilities that a communities should be stated by four people is actually advised by past published really works (elizabeth.g., Lee and you can Fiske, 2006; Dentro de et al., 2013) however, has also been practical in the sense you to definitely a more strict standard do limit the quantity of teams integrated and you can a very lenient one could include way too many teams to be ranked.
Considering this type of criteria, 19 men subgroups (team boys, dads out-of young kids, police- and you can fire fighters, bachelors, rich boys, works guys, mellow people, men students, outdoorsy males, unmarried dads, helpful guys, solitary people, men frontrunners, dated boys, homosexual guys, men academics, stylish people, men political figures, and you will rockers) and you can twenty two subgroups of women (solitary moms and dads, lady politicians, profession female, mothers out-of little ones, nurses, feminists, female people, outdoorsy lady, teachers (the feminine sort of the definition of from inside the Norwegian was used), lesbians, dated people, webmasters, single females, immigrant lady, manly girls, girls, female musicians, do it ladies, women academics, style lady, housewives, and you can people management) was basically chose.
Going for organizations to some extent based on the salience in the pilot take to isn’t rather than dangers. Because Fiske ainsi que al. (2002) described, one another teams eliciting aversion plus in-communities is generally less likely to want to come. We keep in mind that all of our directory of organizations is bound in lots of ways: Including, the list does not incorporate a complete a number of intimate orientations (elizabeth.g., bisexual women or men is excluded, heterosexuality wasn’t stated from the pilot and you may allegedly removed to have granted), and you can “immigrants” were utilized as opposed to indicating specific ethnicities or nations regarding source. We’re not recommending our number are member of the subgroups that ladies and you can males could possibly get end up in. Although not, the groups chose is actually salient regarding Norwegian context, and lots of of included intercourse subgroups was basically recognized during the prior lookup in other federal contexts (Athenstaedt ainsi que al., 2008).