Abstract
This research investigated the conditions under which males might perceive sexuality in females in heterosexual interactions (the Abbey effect). Caucasian male and female couples participated in a brief interaction in which they were rated by observers. Interactants also rated themselves as well as their partners. These live interactions were videotaped, audiotaped, and photographed, and subsequently rated by other observers (subjects). Subjects made ratings on a variety of dimensions, including adjectives relating to the “sexuality” of the interactants as well as the interactants' desire for future interaction with their partners. Results indicated that males attributed more sexuality and a higher desire for future interactions to females they observed or with whom they interacted than females did. Further, the tendency to attribute sexuality was affected by way in which stimuli were presented to the raters. Photos, which had the least amount of information relative to the other methods, produced the highest sexuality and future interaction ratings, suggesting that stereotyping might play a role. Implications of the results and future research are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Abbey, A., & Melby, C. (1986). The effects of nonverbal cues on gender differences in perceptions of sexual intent.Sex Roles 15 283–298.
Abbey, A. (1982). Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: Do males misperceive females' friendliness?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42 830–838.
Abbey, A., Cozzarelli, C., McLaughlin, K., & Harnish, R. J. (1987). The effects of clothing and dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: Do women and men evaluate these cues differently?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17 108–126.
Conger, A. J. (1984). Statistical Considerations. In M. Hersen, L. Michelson, & A. S. Bellack (Eds.),Issues in Psychotherapy Research. New York: Plenum Press.
Dar, R., Serlin, R., & Omer, H. (1994). Misuse of statistical tests in three decades of psychotherapy research.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62 75–82.
Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makkijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good ⋯: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype.Psychological Bulletin, 110 109–128.
Edmondson, C. B. (1992).Gender differences in social perception: Do males perceive more sexuality than females in heterosexual interactions? Unpublished master's thesis. Purdue University.
Fisher, W. A., Grenier, G., Watters, W. W., Lamont, J., Cohen, M., & Askwith, J. (1988). Students' sexual knowledge, attitudes toward sex, and willingness to treat sexual concerns.Journal of Medical Education.63 379–385.
Gaulier, B., & Allgeier, E. R. (1989).Male versus female perceptions of sexual intent in a dyadic interaction. Unpublished paper, Bowling Green State University.
Hansen, C. H., & Hansen, R. D. (1988). How rock music videos can change what is seen when boy meets girl: Priming stereotype appraisal of social interactions.Sex Roles, 19 287–316.
Koralewski, M., & Conger, J. C. (1992). The measurement of social skills among sexually coercive males.Journal of Sex Research, 29 169–188.
Quakenbush, R. L. (1987). Sex roles and social perception.Human Relations, 40 659–670.
Saal, F. E., Johnson, C. B., & Weber, N. (1989). Friendly or sexy? It may depend on who you ask.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13 263–276.
Shotland, R. L. (1985). A preliminary model of some causes of date rape.Academic Psychology Bulletin, 7 187–200.
Shotland, R. L. & Craig, J. M. (1988). Can men and women differentiate between friendly and sexually interested behavior?Social Psychology Quarterly, 51 66–73.
Sigal, J., Gibbs, M., Adams, B., & Derfler, P. (1988). The effect of romantic and nonromantic films on perception of female friendly and seductive behavior.Sex Roles, 19 545–554.
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2 219–220.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was based on a master's thesis conducted by the first author under the direction of the second author. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Anthony J. Conger in the design and analysis of this research.
To whom reprint requests should be addressed at Purdue University, Department of Psychological Sciences, West Lafayette, IN 47907.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Edmondson, C.B., Conger, J.C. The impact of mode of presentation on gender differences in social perception. Sex Roles 32, 169–183 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544787
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544787