CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Gender Studies in LanguageSocial and Intergroup PsychologyLinguistic Variation and Morphology

Ideological origins of resistance against gender-inclusive language reforms: singular they as a de-gendering or multi-gendering strategy

Open access
Renström, Emma A., Klysing, Amanda·2025·Political Psychology
DOI 10.1111/pops.13058
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Gender is traditionally conceptualized as a binary construct, which is reflected in the use of binary‐gendered third‐person pronouns. Gender‐inclusive pronouns such as singular they challenge this conceptualization, which can evoke resistance against their use. Singular they can be used generically when gender is unknown (de‐gendering), or to specifically highlight an individual's non‐binary gender identity (multi‐gendering). The different uses of singular they can threaten different ideological convictions and impact the use and perception of the pronoun. Experiment 1 (N = 599) showed that in de‐gendering contexts, participants preferred to use singular they but in multi‐gendering contexts they preferred binary pronouns. Social identification with one's gender group, RWA and binary gender views predicted less use of singular they in both contexts. In Experiment 2 (N = 199), participants evaluated sentences with singular they in de‐gendering and multi‐gendering contexts. Overall, sentences with singular they in de‐gendering contexts were more positively evaluated. SDO predicted less positive evaluations of they in de‐gendering contexts, while RWA and binary gender views predicted less positive evaluations of they in multi‐gendered contexts. The findings provide important knowledge in understanding ideological motivations for resistance against gender‐inclusive language.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/pops.13058

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 an English-speaking study, Renström and Klysing (2024) showed that higher values in right-wing authoritarianism were related to less frequent use of singular they as a gender-neutral pronoun (in favor of gender specific pronouns).

    “Moreover, in an English-speaking study Renström and Klysing (2024) showed that higher values in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA; Bizumic and Duckitt, 2018) were related to less frequent use of singular they as a gender-neutral pronoun (in favor of gender specific pronouns).”

    From What affects people’s use of and attitudes toward gender-inclusive language? A literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Renström and Klysing (2024)

    The Results (page unavailable) report that English-language users with higher scores on a combined RWA/binary-gender-views measure were less likely to use singular they in both de-gendering and multi-gendering contexts. The citing sentence attributes that relationship to RWA alone, whereas the reported analysis combines RWA with binary gender views; the paper also says it did not directly compare use of singular they against use of binary pronouns. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. S Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. University of Manitoba Press.
  2. Ayden, L. (2022). Who is they? Pronoun use across time and social structure [Master thesis in Linguistics, University of Victoria].
  3. Bizumic, B., & Duckitt, J. (2018). Investigating right wing authoritarianism with a very short authoritarianism scale. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 6(1), 129-150. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5964/ jspp. v6i1. 835 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Blaubergs, M. S. (1980). An analysis of classic arguments against changing sexist language. Women's Studies International Quarterly, 3(2-3), 135-147.
  5. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(5), 475-482. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 01461 67291 175001 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Crawford, J. T., Brandt, M. J., Inbar, Y., & Mallinas, S. R. (2016). Right-wing authoritarianism predicts prejudice equally toward "gay men and lesbians" and "homosexuals". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(2), e31-e45. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ pspp0 000070. supp · DOI
  7. Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2014). "A Giant leap for mankind" but what about women? The role of system- justifying ideologies in predicting attitudes toward sexist language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(6), 667-680.
  8. Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41-113). Academic Press.
  9. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2010). Personality, ideology, prejudice and politics: A dual-process motivational model. Journal of Personality, 78, 1861-1894.
  10. Duckitt, J., Wagner, C., du Plessis, I., & Birum, I. (2002). The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: Testing a dual process model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 75-93.
  11. Gustafsson Sendén, M., Bäck, E. A., & Lindqvist, A. (2015). Introducing a gender-neutral pronoun in a natural gender language: The influence of time on attitudes and behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2015. 00893 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Gustafsson Sendén, M., Renström, E. A., & Lindqvist, A. (2021). Pronouns beyond the binary -The change of atti- tudes and use over time. Gender & Society, 35(4), 588-615. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 08912 43221 1029226 · DOI
  13. Hekanaho, L. (2020). Generic and nonbinary pronouns. Usage, acceptability and attitudes (Doctoral Thesis). Helsingfors University. http:// urn. fi/ URN: ISBN: 978-951-51-6832-0
  14. Hill, D. B., & Willoughby, B. L. B. (2005). The development and validation of the genderism and transphobia scale. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 53, 531-544. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s1119 9-005-7140-x · DOI
  15. Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psy- chology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74, 171-193. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1037/ amp00 00307 · DOI
  16. Klysing, A., Renström, E. A., Gustafsson Sendén, M., & Lindqvist, A. (2021). Gender diversity in recruitment: Influence of gender trouble on applicant attraction and evaluation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52, 781-802.
  17. Lindqvist, A., Gustafsson Sendén, M., & Bäck, E. A. (2016). Vem tycker om hen? [who likes hen? Swedish] (Vol. 26, pp. 101-129). Språk och stil.
  18. Lindqvist, A., Gustafsson Sendén, M., & Renström, E. A. (2020). What is gender, anyway: A review of the op- tions for operationalising gender. Psychology & Sexuality, 1-13, 332-344. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 19419 899. 2020. 1729844 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Lindqvist, A., Renström, E. A., & Gustafsson Sendén, M. (2019). Reducing a male bias in language? Establishing the efficiency of three different gender-fair language strategies. Sex Roles, 81(1), 109-117. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s1119 9-018-0974-9 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one's social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(3), 302-318. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 01461 67292 183006 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Major, B., & Kaiser, C. R. (2017). Ideology and the maintenance of group inequality. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 582-592. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 13684 30217 712051 · DOI
  22. Meyers, M. (1990). Current generic pronoun usage: An empirical study. American Speech, 65(3), 228-237. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 455911 · DOI
  23. Morgenroth, T., Sendén, M. G., Lindqvist, A., Renström, E. A., Ryan, M. K., & Morton, T. A. (2021). Defending the sex/gender binary: The role of gender identification and need for closure. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 731-740. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 19485 50620 937188 · DOI
  24. Morgenroth, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2018). Gender trouble in social psychology: How can Butler's work inform exper- imental social psychologists' conceptualization of gender? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1-9. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpsyg. 2018. 01320 · DOI
  25. Morgenroth, T., & Ryan, M. K. (2020). The effects of gender trouble: An integrative theoretical framework of the perpetuation and disruption of the gender/sex binary. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16, 1113-1142. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 17456 91620 902442 · DOI
  26. Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (1998). Influence of age, gender, and context on attitudes toward sexist/nonsexist language: Is sport a special case? Sex Roles, 38(5-6), 477-494.
  27. Parks, J. B., & Roberton, M. A. (2005). Explaining age and gender effects on attitudes toward sexist language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24(4), 401-411.
  28. Perez-Arche, H., & Miller, D. J. (2021). What predicts attitudes toward transgender and nonbinary people? An explo- ration of gender, authoritarianism, social dominance, and gender ideology. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 85(3-4), 172-189. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11199-020-01212-3 · DOI
  29. Peterson, B. E., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2010). Gender, sexuality, and the authoritarian personality. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1801-1826. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1467-6494. 2010. 00670. x · DOI
  30. Poteat, V. P., & Mereish, E. H. (2012). Ideology, prejudice, and attitudes toward sexual minority social policies and organizations. Psychology, 33(2), 211-224. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ j
  31. Pratto, F., Idam, A. C., Stewart, A. L., Zeineddine, F. B., Aranda, M., Aiello, A., Chryssochoou, X., Cichocka, A., Cohrs, J. C., Durrheim, K., Ronique Eicher, V., Foels, R., Gó Rska, P., Lee, I.-C., Licata, L., Liu, J. H., Li, L., Meyer, I., Morselli, D., … Henkel, K. E. (2013). Social dominance in context and in individuals: Contextual mod- eration of robust effects of social dominance orientation in 15 languages and 20 countries. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(5), 587-599. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 19485 50612 473663 · DOI
  32. Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269-281.
  33. Renström, E. A., Bäck, H., & Carroll, R. (2022). Protecting the ingroup? Authoritarianism, immigration attitudes, and affective polarization. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fpos. 2022. 919236 · DOI
  34. Renström, E. A., Lindqvist, A., Akbas, G., Hekanaho, L., & Gustafsson Sendén, M. (2023). Are gender-neutral pro- nouns really neutral? Testing a male bias in the grammatical genderless languages Turkish and Finnish. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 42, 1-12.
  35. Renström, E. A., Lindqvist, A., & Gustafsson Sendén, M. (2022). The multiple meanings of the gender-inclusive pronoun hen: Predicting attitudes and use. European Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 71-90. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ ejsp. 2816 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Renström, E. A., Lindqvist, A., Klysing, A., & Gustafsson Sendén, M. (2024). Personal pronouns and person percep- tion -Do paired and nonbinary pronouns evoke a normative gender bias? British Journal of Psychology (London, England: 1953), 115(2), 253-274. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ bjop. 12686 · DOI
  37. Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165-179.
  38. Schudson, Z. C., & Morgenroth, T. (2022). Non-binary gender/sex identities. Current Opinion in Psychology, 48, 101499. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. copsyc. 2022. 101499 · DOI
  39. Schudson, Z. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2022). Gender/sex diversity beliefs: Scale construction, validation, and links to prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(4), 1011-1036. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 13684 30220 987595 · DOI
  40. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25, 845-880. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/j. 1467-9221. 2004. 00401. x · DOI · Paper page
  41. Skewes, L., Fine, C., & Haslam, N. (2018). Beyond Mars and Venus: The role of gender essentialism in support for gender inequality and backlash. PLoS One, 13(7), e0200921.
  42. Stephan, W. G., Ybarra, O., & Morrison, K. R. (2015). Intergroup threat theory. In T. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  43. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-37). Brooks/Cole.
  44. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24).
  45. Tee, N., & Hegarty, P. (2006). Predicting opposition to the civil rights of trans persons in the United Kingdom. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 70-80.
  46. Thoma, B. C., Eckstrand, K. L., Montano, G. T., Rezeppa, T. L., & Marshal, M. P. (2021). Gender nonconfor- mity and minority stress among lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals: A meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16, 1165-1183. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1177/ 17456 91620 968766 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Wilson, M. S., & Liu, J. H. (2003). Social dominance orientation and gender: The moderating role of gender identity. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 42(Pt 2), 187-198. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1348/ 01446 66033 22127175 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Renström, E. A., & Klysing, A.
Affiliations
  • Kristianstad University (SE)
  • Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Renström, Emma A.
ORCID
Venue
Political Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2024-10-22
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
1062-1080
ISSN
  • 0162-895X (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9221
DOI
10.1111/pops.13058
OpenAlex
W4403656201
Cited by
13
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8
FWCI
9.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Political Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Vetenskapsrådet (2023‐00731)
  • Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd (2017‐00418)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies in Language
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistic Variation and Morphology
Keywords
singular they, gender-inclusive language, gender binary, de-gendering, non-binary gender identity, ideological motivation, social identification, third-person pronouns

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