Toward Gender Understanding: Examining Ambivalent Sexism among University Students and Its Impact on Faculty Evaluation

Abstract

This study examines gender differences in levels of sexism among university students and evaluates variations in assessing sexist attitudes toward professors. The aim is to analyze potential disparities between men and women regarding ambivalent sexism (both hostile and benevolent) and to determine if these differences influence the evaluation of specific behaviors by teaching faculty. Additionally, the present study seeks to validate the variability hypothesis, asserting that men are over-represented in the extremes of distributions compared to women concerning analyzed sexist attitudes. Eighty university students participated voluntarily and anonymously, completing three questionnaires on ambivalent sexism, neosexism, and the assessment of sexist behaviors by their instructors. Consistent with prior research, the results reveal higher levels of sexism among men in this context. Despite these differences, both men and women align in evaluating specific behaviors in teaching faculty, irrespective of their individual levels of sexism. Finally, the data presented support the variability hypothesis, indicating greater variability in sexist attitudes among men than women. These findings suggest that general attitudes assessed in most questionnaires might not be representative of the behaviors and attitudes that people display in real specific situations. This could change how future research and interventions approach these issues.