Cited by 95Social and Intergroup PsychologyGender and Feminist StudiesGender Roles and Identity Studies

Development and validation of Swedish classical and modern sexism scales

Ekehammar, Bo, Akrami, Nazar, Araya, Tadesse·2000·Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

Abstract

In two studies we develop and validate a Classical--overt or direct--and a Modern--covert or subtle--Sexism Scale concerning attitudes toward women, for a Swedish (Scandinavian) context. Further, we examine whether these two forms of prejudice are distinguishable. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that, although highly correlated, classical and modern sexism are distinguishable. The construct validations showed that men had higher means on modern and classical sexism scores than women, and that our scales were related to other constructs as expected. In a third study, we analyzed the knowledge and the content of cultural stereotypes about women. There were no differences in the knowledge of cultural stereotypes between men and women or between high- and low-sexist individuals. The findings are discussed in relation to previous international studies that examine people's modern and/or classical sexism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9450.00203

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Gustafsson Sendén et al. (2015), self-reported use of the gender-neutral pronoun hen was negatively correlated with levels of sexism.

    “Also, in the Swedish-language study by Gustafsson Sendén et al. (2015), a negative correlation was found between self-reported use of the gender-neutral pronoun hen and levels of sexism, measured by the Swedish version of the Modern Sexism Scale (Ekehammar et al., 2000).”
  • Men are higher in sexism compared to women.

    “Research has shown for a long time that men are higher in sexism compared to women (e.g. Ekehammar et al., 2000; Swim & Cohen, 1997; Swim et al., 1995).”

    From A Sexist Language? Gender Differences in Attitudes and Use of Gender-Inclusive Pronouns (2025) · cites this paper as Ekehammar et al., 2000

  • Men as a group, on average, express significantly more sexist attitudes compared to women as a group.

    “men as a group, on average, express significantly more sexist attitudes compared to women as a group (Ekehammar et al., 2000; Swim & Cohen, 1997; Swim et al., 1995)”

    From A Sexist Language? Gender Differences in Attitudes and Use of Gender-Inclusive Pronouns (2025) · cites this paper as Ekehammar et al., 2000

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., & Araya, T.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Ekehammar, Bo
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-12
Volume
41
Issue
4
Pages
307-314
ISSN
  • 0036-5564 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9450
OpenAlex
W2012764009
Cited by
95
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
Keywords
modern sexism, attitudes toward women, gender stereotypes, gender differences in prejudice, scale development, Swedish language
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prejudice, Psychological Tests, Sex Factors, Stereotyping, Sweden, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review