Side effects of gender-fair language: How feminine job titles influence the evaluation of female applicants

In many languages, feminization has been used as a strategy to make language more gender-fair, because masculine terms, even in a generic function, exhibit a male bias. Up to date, little is known about possible side effects of this language use, for example, in personnel selection. In three studies, conducted in Polish, we analyzed how a female applicant was evaluated in a recruitment process, depending on whether she was introduced with a feminine or masculine job title. To avoid influences from existing occupations and terms, we used fictitious job titles in Studies 1 and 2: diarolożka (feminine) and diarolog (masculine). In Study 3, we referred to existing occupations that varied in gender stereotypicality. In all studies, female applicants with a feminine job title were evaluated less favorably than both a male applicant (Study 1) and a female applicant with a masculine job title (Studies 1, 2, and 3). This effect was independent of the gender stereotypicality of the occupation (Study 3). Participants' political attitudes, however, moderated the effect: Conservatives devaluated female applicants with a feminine title more than liberals (Studies 2 and 3).

Strategies to increase the use and approval of gender-fair language

When masculine forms are used to refer to men and women, this causes male-biased cognitive representations and behavioral consequences, as numerous studies have shown. This effect can be avoided or reduced with the help of gender-fair language. In this talk, we will present different approaches that aim at influencing people’s use of and attitudes towards gender-fair language. Firstly, we tested the influence of gender-fair input on people’s own use of gender-fair language. Based on Irmen and Linner’s (2005) adaptation of the scenario mapping and focus approach (Sanford & Garrod, 1998), we found that after reading a text with gender-fair forms women produced more gender-fair forms than women who read gender-neutral texts or texts containing masculine generics. Men were not affected. Secondly, we examined reactions to arguments which followed the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty &Cacioppo, 1986). We assumed that strong pros and cons would be more effective than weak arguments or control statements. The results indicated that strong pros could convince some, but not all participants, suggesting a complex interplay of diverse factors in reaction to attempts at persuasion. The influence of people’s initial characteristics will be discussed. Currently, we are investigating how self-generated refutations, in addition to arguments, may influence initial attitudes. Based on the resistance appraisal hypothesis (Tormala, 2008), we assume that individuals are encouraged in their initial attitude if they manage to refute strong counter-arguments. The results of our studies will be discussed regarding their practical implications.