Ambivalent sexism as a boundary condition for the contact hypothesis: The case of romantic relationships

This thesis examines whether cross-gender contact can reduce ambivalent sexism in men. According to intergroup contact theory (e.g. Allport, 1954, Amir, 1969, Pettigrew, 1997), positive contact reduces prejudice. Sexism has been defined as gender-based prejudice (Glick & Fiske, 1996); hence contact may reduce sexism in men. However, a literature review suggests that men distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ women (e.g. Tavris & Wade, 1984) and respond to them differentially (e.g. Glick et al., 1997). Thus, cross-gender contact might not be effective in reducing sexism and the reverse causal sequence may be operating. It is the aim of this thesis to test these opposing predictions.

This thesis presents nine empirical studies. Study 1 links ambivalent sexism and the contact hypothesis. Studies 2 and 3 attempt to establish the causal sequence of the link between sexism and contact. Study 4 is a simplification of Study 1, focussing on the context of romantic relationships. Study 5 is a pilot study, testing materials by Siebler et al. (2008) and linking them to the stereotype content model (Fiske et ah, 2002). These materials are used in Studies 6 to 8, which assess whether ambivalent sexism predicts partner (i.e. contact) preferences in men. Study 9 presents longitudinal data to address the question regarding the causal sequence of the sexism - contact link.

Taken together, the results indicate that sexism leads to selective contact preferences in men. While hostile sexism is linked to contact quality, Study 8 indicates that this is due to the rejection of non-traditional romantic partners by men high in hostile sexism. With reference to benevolent sexism, the results indicate that higher levels of benevolent sexism predict preferences for a traditional romantic partner. The thesis concludes with a summary of the findings, a discussion of limitations and suggestions for future research.