Perception of Faces and Elaboration of Gender and Victim/Aggressor Stereotypes: The Influence of Internet Use and of the Perceiver's Personality.
cybervictimization
empathy
gender
past events of aggression
personality
social media
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
27
05
2020
accepted:
04
05
2021
entrez:
9
7
2021
pubmed:
10
7
2021
medline:
10
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The use of social media, particularly among youngsters, is characterized by simple and fast image exploration, mostly of people, particularly faces. The study presented here was conducted in order to investigate stereotypical judgments about men and women concerning past events of aggression-perpetrated or suffered-expressed on the basis of their faces, and gender-related differences in the judgments. To this aim, 185 participants answered a structured questionnaire online. The questionnaire contained 30 photos of young people's faces, 15 men and 15 women (Ma et al., 2015), selected on the basis of the neutrality of their expression, and participants were asked to rate each face with respect to masculinity/femininity, strength/weakness, and having a past of aggression, as a victim or as a perpetrator. Information about the empathic abilities and personality traits of participants were also collected. The results indicate that the stereotypes-both of gender and those of victims and perpetrators-emerge as a consequence of the visual exploration of faces that present no facial emotion. Some characteristics of the personality of the observers, such as neuroticism, extraversion, openness, conscientiousness, and affective empathy, have a role in facilitating or hindering stereotype processing, in different ways for male and female faces by male and female observers. In particular, both genders attribute their positive stereotypical attributes to same-gender faces: men see male faces as stronger, masculine, and more aggressive than women do, and women see female faces as more feminine, less weak, and less as victims than men do. Intensive use of social media emerges as a factor that could facilitate the expression of some stereotypes of violent experiences and considering female subjects as more aggressive. Findings in this study can contribute to research on aggressive behavior on the Internet and improve our understanding of the multiple factors involved in the elaboration of gender stereotypes relative to violent or victim behavior.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34239467
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.561480
pmc: PMC8258252
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
561480Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Bracci, Guidi, Marchigiani, Masini, Palmitesta and Parlangeli.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:519-45
pubmed: 25196277
Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:279-300
pubmed: 17550343
J Autism Dev Disord. 2004 Apr;34(2):163-75
pubmed: 15162935
J Genet Psychol. 2014 Sep-Dec;175(5-6):382-400
pubmed: 25271816
J Adolesc. 2006 Aug;29(4):589-611
pubmed: 16198409
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Dec;47(4):1122-1135
pubmed: 25582810
PLoS One. 2009 Jun 22;4(6):e5952
pubmed: 19543398
Nat Neurosci. 2016 Jun;19(6):795-7
pubmed: 27135216
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2013 Feb;47(2):153-9
pubmed: 23047959
Trends Cogn Sci. 2016 May;20(5):362-374
pubmed: 27050834
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2018 Jul;21(7):437-443
pubmed: 29995530
Front Psychol. 2019 May 09;10:1050
pubmed: 31143150
Psychol Rev. 2011 Apr;118(2):247-79
pubmed: 21355661
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2015;68(10):2106-15
pubmed: 25608032
Vision Res. 2016 Dec;129:69-76
pubmed: 27923772
Eur Psychiatry. 2015 Nov;30(8):1021-7
pubmed: 26512450
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 02;10(9):e0135529
pubmed: 26331610
Psychiatry Res. 2015 Sep 30;229(1-2):340-6
pubmed: 26235473
Emotion. 2006 May;6(2):269-78
pubmed: 16768559
Psychol Sci. 2009 Oct;20(10):1194-8
pubmed: 19686297
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2004 Oct;45(7):1308-16
pubmed: 15335350
Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2008 May 1;2(3):1497
pubmed: 20107613
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2013 Jun;23(3):373-80
pubmed: 23347644
J Adolesc. 2009 Apr;32(2):393-408
pubmed: 18691746
Brain Cogn. 2008 Jul;67(2):162-7
pubmed: 18295950
Emotion. 2009 Feb;9(1):128-33
pubmed: 19186926
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 02;8(10):e76825
pubmed: 24098566
Pers Individ Dif. 2007 Oct;43(6):1594-1603
pubmed: 18836509
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003 Jul;29(7):807-18
pubmed: 15018670
Conscious Cogn. 2008 Dec;17(4):1093-104
pubmed: 18424178
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 9;99(14):9602-5
pubmed: 12082186
Front Psychol. 2020 May 29;11:936
pubmed: 32547442
Perception. 2010;39(3):356-77
pubmed: 20465172
Yonsei Med J. 2014 May;55(3):826-30
pubmed: 24719154
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Feb;92(2):179-90
pubmed: 17279844
Mem Cognit. 2010 Apr;38(3):265-78
pubmed: 20234017
Cyberpsychol Behav. 2001 Jun;4(3):373-6
pubmed: 11710262
Front Psychol. 2020 Feb 21;11:211
pubmed: 32153455
Work. 2019;63(3):469-477
pubmed: 31256099
Nature. 1998 Aug 27;394(6696):884-7
pubmed: 9732869
PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e37253
pubmed: 22675479
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Aug 12;105(32):11087-92
pubmed: 18685089
Psychol Sci. 2006 Jul;17(7):592-8
pubmed: 16866745