title: Ambivalent Sexism in Close Relationships: (Hostile) Power and (Benevolent) Romance Shape Relationship Ideals.
abstract: Gender-based structural power and heterosexual dependency produce ambivalent gender ideologies, with hostility and benevolence separately shaping close-relationship ideals. The relative importance of romanticized benevolent versus more overtly power-based hostile sexism, however, may be culturally dependent. Testing this, northeast US (N=311) and central Chinese (N=290) undergraduates rated prescriptions and proscriptions (ideals) for partners and completed Ambivalent Sexism and Ambivalence toward Men Inventories (ideologies). Multiple regressions analyses conducted on group-specific relationship ideals revealed that benevolent ideologies predicted partner ideals, in both countries, especially for US culture's romance-oriented relationships. Hostile attitudes predicted men's ideals, both American and Chinese, suggesting both societies' dominant-partner advantage.
authors.affiliation: Princeton University.
authors.forename: Tiane L
authors.initials: TL
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Susan T
authors.initials: ST
authors.lastname: Fiske
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Glick
authors.forename: Zhixia
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Chen
keywords: ambivalent sexism; close relationships; culture; gender roles; power; romance
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001 Jan;80(1):86-94
references.pmid: 11195894
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Jan;84(1):111-25
references.pmid: 12518974
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Nov;79(5):763-75
references.pmid: 11079240
references.citation: J Sex Res. 2003 Aug;40(3):296-302
references.pmid: 14533024
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 May;86(5):713-28
references.pmid: 15161396
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Mar;88(3):498-509
references.pmid: 15740442
references.citation: Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004 Jan;30(1):3-12
references.pmid: 15030638
references.citation: Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003 Nov;29(11):1357-70
references.pmid: 15189575
references.citation: Sex Roles. 2009 Jun;60(11-12):765-778
references.pmid: 24058258