REVIEW PAPER
The relationship between religiosity and ambivalent sexism: a systematic review and meta-analysis
1
Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, Poland
Submission date: 2023-08-28
Final revision date: 2024-05-07
Acceptance date: 2024-07-08
Online publication date: 2024-11-04
Current Issues in Personality Psychology 2025;13(2):67-81
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore and analyze the existing research on the relationship between religiosity and two forms of ambivalent sexism: benevolent and hostile. A narrative synthesis approach and meta-analysis based on Fisher’s z-transformed correlation coefficients were used to summarize the findings. The findings are reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The findings suggest that religiosity is associated positively with both forms of ambivalent sexism. There was a stronger positive correlation between religiosity and benevolent sexism (z = .29, 95% CI [.26; .33]) than between religiosity and hostile sexism (z = .19, 95% CI [.13; .25]). However, the relationship varied significantly across studies, suggesting moderating roles of religious affiliation and gender. The findings highlight the need for more nuanced and intersectional approaches. Empirical models which will allow a better understanding of this relationship are proposed.
REFERENCES (47)
1.
Alcidi, M., Gribaldo, A., Grande, E., & Rosario, C. (2023). Forum: Religion, security, and gender. Public Anthropol-ogist, 5, 53–115. https://doi.org/10.1163/258917....
2.
Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/h00212....
3.
Beit-Hallahmi, B. (2003). Religion, religiosity, and gender. In C. R. Ember & M. Ember (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sex and gender (pp. 117–127). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-....
4.
Besta, T., Gómez, Á., & Vázquez, A. (2014). Readiness to deny the group’s wrongdoing and willingness to fight for its members. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 2, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2....
5.
Blumell, L. E., & Rodriguez, N. S. (2020). Ambivalent sexism and gay men in the US and UK. Sexuality & Culture, 24, 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119....
6.
Brandt, M. J., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2017). People both high and low on religious fundamentalism are prejudiced toward dissimilar groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp00....
7.
Burn, S. M., & Busso, J. (2005). Ambivalent sexism, scriptural literalism, and religiosity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471....
8.
Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for wom-en’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764–779. https://doi.org/.
10.
Davis, T. M., Settles, I. H., & Jones, M. K. (2022). Standpoints and situatedness: Examining the perception of be-nevolent sexism in black and white undergraduate women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 46, 8–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/036168....
11.
Gaunt, R. (2012). “Blessed is he who has not made me a woman”: Ambivalent sexism and Jewish religiosity. Sex Roles, 67, 477–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
12.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3....
13.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifica-tions for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-0....
14.
Glick, P., Lameiras, M., & Castro, Y. R. (2002). Education and Catholic religiosity as predictors of hostile and be-nevolent sexism toward women and men. Sex Roles, 47, 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021....
15.
Glick, P., Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Akbaş, G., Orta, İ. M., & Ceylan, S. (2016). Why do women endorse honor beliefs? Ambivalent sexism and religiosity as predictors. Sex Roles, 75, 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
16.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1146/annure....
17.
Gutierrez, B. C., & Leaper, C. (2024). Linking ambivalent sexism to violence-against-women attitudes and behav-iors: a three-level meta-analytic review. Sexuality & Culture, 28, 851–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119....
18.
Hannover, B., Gubernath, J., Schultze, M., & Zander, L. (2018). Religiosity, religious fundamentalism, and ambiva-lent sexism toward girls and women among adolescents and young adults living in Germany. Frontiers in Psy-chology, 9, 2399. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.....
19.
Heath, E. G., & Sperry, K. (2021). A religious paradox: Can priming ideas of God reduce rape victim blame? Sex Roles, 84, 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
20.
Hellmer, K., Stenson, J. T., & Jylhä, K. M. (2018). What’s (not) underpinning ambivalent sexism? Revisiting the roles of ideology, religiosity, personality, demographics, and men’s facial hair in explaining hostile and benevo-lent sexism. Personality and Individual Differences, 122, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid....
21.
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2009). A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 172, 137–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467....
22.
Hill, S., & Marshall, T. C. (2018). Beliefs about sexual assault in India and Britain are explained by attitudes toward women and hostile sexism. Sex Roles, 79, 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
23.
Hjelm, T. (2014). Religion, discourse and power: a contribution towards a critical sociology of religion. Critical Sociology, 40, 855–872. https://doi.org/10.1177/089692....
24.
Husnu, S. (2016). The role of ambivalent sexism and religiosity in predicting attitudes toward childlessness in Mus-lim undergraduate students. Sex Roles, 75, 573–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
25.
Jaśkiewicz, M., & Sobiecki, J. (2022). When out-groups are perceived as out of place: Urban disorder sensitivity and environmental distance. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 10, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2....
26.
Kossowska, M., Czernatowicz-Kukuczka, A., & Sekerdej, M. (2017). Many faces of dogmatism: Prejudice as a way of protecting certainty against value violators among dogmatic believers and atheists. British Journal of Psy-chology, 108, 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.1....
27.
Kosakowska‐Berezecka, N., Besta, T., Bosson, J. K., Jurek, P., Vandello, J. A., Best, D. L., Wlodarczyk, A., Safdar, S., Zawisza, M., Żadkowska, M., Sobiecki, J., Agyemang, C. B., Akbaş, G., Ammirati, S., Anderson, J., Anjum, G., Aruta, J. J. B. R., Ashraf, M., Bakaitytė, A., ... Žukauskienė, R. (2020). Country‐level and individual‐level pre-dictors of men’s support for gender equality in 42 countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 1276–1291. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2....
28.
Leavitt, C. E., Allsop, D. B., Price, A. A., Marks, L. D., & Dollahite, D. C. (2021). Exploring gender roles in highly religious families. Review of Religious Research, 63, 511–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644....
29.
Maftei, A., Holman, A. C., & Marchiș, M. (2023). Choosing a life with no children. The role of sexism on the rela-tionship between religiosity and the attitudes toward voluntary childlessness. Current Psychology, 42, 11486–11496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144....
30.
Maitner, A. T., & Henry, P. J. (2018). Ambivalent sexism in the United Arab Emirates: Quantifying gender attitudes in a rapidly modernizing society. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 831–843. https://doi.org/10.1177/136843....
31.
Mikołajczak, M., & Pietrzak, J. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and religion: Connected through values. Sex Roles, 70, 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
32.
Mir‐Hosseini, Z. (2006). Muslim women’s quest for equality: Between Islamic law and feminism. Critical Inquiry, 32, 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1086/508085.
33.
Orme, L. M. N., Hall, M. E. L., Anderson, T. L., & McMartin, J. (2017). Power, sexism, and gender: Factors in bibli-cal interpretation. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 45, 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164....
34.
Page, M. J., Moher, D., & McKenzie, J. E. (2022). Introduction to PRISMA 2020 and implications for research syn-thesis methodologists. Research Synthesis Methods, 13, 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1....
35.
Paynter, A., & Leaper, C. (2016). Heterosexual dating double standards in undergraduate women and men. Sex Roles, 75, 393–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
36.
Piggott, D. M., & Anderson, R. E. (2023). Religion after rape: Changes in faith and hindered acknowledgment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38, 3883–3905. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626....
37.
R Core Team (2023). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Compu-ting. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.
38.
Schnabel, L. (2018). More religious, less dogmatic: Toward a general framework for gender differences in religion. Social Science Research, 75, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssre....
39.
Shariff, A. F., Willard, A. K., Andersen, T., & Norenzayan, A. (2016). Religious priming: a meta-analysis with a focus on prosociality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20, 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/108886....
40.
Simsek, M., Fleischmann, F., & van Tubergen, F. (2019). Similar or divergent paths? Religious development of Christian and Muslim adolescents in Western Europe. Social Science Research, 79, 160–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssre....
41.
Singhal, S., & Gupta, V. (2022). Religiosity and homophobia: Examining the impact of perceived importance of childbearing, hostile sexism and gender. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 19, 1636–1649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178....
42.
Sterne, J. A. C., Sutton, A. J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Terrin, N., Jones, D. R., Lau, J., Carpenter, J., Rücker, G., Harbord, R. M., Schmid, C. H., Tetzlaff, J., Deeks, J. J., Peters, J., Macaskill, P., Schwarzer, G., Duval, S., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2011). Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. BMJ, 343, d4002. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d4....
43.
Taşdemir, N., & Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2010). The relationships between ambivalent sexism and religiosity among Turkish university students. Sex Roles, 62, 420–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199....
44.
Van Assche, J., Koç, Y., & Roets, A. (2019). Religiosity or ideology? On the individual differences predictors of sex-ism. Personality and Individual Differences, 139, 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid....
45.
Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v....
46.
Wood, H. J. (2019). Gender inequality: The problem of harmful, patriarchal, traditional and cultural gender prac-tices in the church. HTS Teologiese Studies, 75, a5177. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v7....
47.
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2....
Copyright: © Institute of Psychology, University of Gdansk This is an Open Access journal, all articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
| eISSN: | 2353-561X |
| ISSN: | 2353-4192 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
