Cited by 9Gender Studies in LanguageLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicySocial and Intergroup Psychology

Toward Visibility: Using the Swedish Gender-Inclusive Pronoun Hen Increases Gender Categorization of Androgynous Faces as Nonbinary

Open access
van Berlekom, Elli, Sczesny, Sabine, Sendén, Marie Gustafsson·2024·Journal of Language and Social Psychology

Abstract

Nonbinary people face invisibility and misrecognition. This research investigated how the use of the Swedish gender-inclusive neopronoun hen influenced the gender categorization of faces beyond the binary. In a between-subjects design, participants ( N = 368) were instructed to use the gender-inclusive neopronoun hen, the binary masculine pronoun han (he), or no pronoun in a writing task. Then, they categorized androgynous morphed faces by selecting one of four response options (“woman,” “man,” “nonbinary,” or “I don't know”). Altogether, the results indicated that few participants responded “I don't know,” indicating that categorizing gender by appearance is common. As expected, the use of the gender-inclusive pronoun increased nonbinary categorizations, whereas the use of the masculine pronoun did not increase man categorizations, documenting that gender-inclusive pronouns increase the visibility of nonbinary people. Gender binary beliefs were associated with less nonbinary categorization. The discussion outlines how these findings can inform social policymaking.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0261927x241289914

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Both de-gendering and multi-gendering strategies can contribute to inclusion and visibility in language, which can benefit women, sexual minorities, transgender people, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals.

    “Both strategies can contribute to inclusion and visibility in language, which can benefit women, sexual minorities, transgender people, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming individuals (Klysing et al., 2022; van Berlekom et al., 2024).”

    From A Sexist Language? Gender Differences in Attitudes and Use of Gender-Inclusive Pronouns (2025) · cites this paper as van Berlekom et al., 2024

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Berlekom, E., Sczesny, S., & Sendén, M. G.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
Venue
Journal of Language and Social Psychology
Published
2024-10
Volume
43
Issue
5-6
Pages
525-543
ISSN
  • 0261-927X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6526
OpenAlex
W4403498897
Cited by
9
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6
FWCI
6.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Language and Social Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Ax:on Johnsson Foundation (F20-0502)
  • Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (P16-0058:1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Studies in Language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
gender-neutral pronouns, hens, non-binary people, gender categorization, face perception, Swedish language, morphed faces

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