US tab

Discussion

Pervasiveness and detrimental impact of sexism are potential predictors of sexism (Miner-Rubino & Cortino, 2007; Fischer & Holz, 2007; Zucker & Landry, 2007; Ibraeva & Kalizhanova, 2016). Based on previous literature, several variables posed as possible predictors, including MFT dimensions, Big Five personality traits, and spirituality/religiousness (Vecina, 2017; Flynn, 2005; Schnabel, 2016; Gross, 2014; Gaunt, 2012).

H1, H2, H3, and H4 were all supported based on the correlations test. Agreeableness, openness, altruism, and compassion were all significantly negatively correlated with hostile sexism. These findings are consistent with the essence of sexism: that sexist and misogynistic attitudes are dehumanizing and therefore do not coincide with humanitarian traits such as agreeableness, altruism, and compassion (Manne, 2017; Vecina, 2017). It is understandable that someone who is misogynistic will not be agreeable, altruistic, or compassionate (Hideg & Ferris, 2016; Hellmer, Stenson, & Jylhä, 2018). Previous research on compassion has shown that it is a predictor of benevolent sexism (Hideg & Ferris, 2016). Because my results indicate that agreeableness is a significant predictor, my study corroborates previous literature that indicates humanistic, compassionate traits can be predictors of misogyny.

H5a, H5b, and H5c were all supported. Participants who scored high on the benevolent sexism scale also were high on the morality dimensions of ingroup, purity, and authority. These findings reflect previous research that sexist attitudes are related to the dimensions of MFT (Vecina & Piñuela, 2017). It is understandable that the MFT dimensions are related to sexism, considering that MFT assesses human moral reasoning (Vecina, 2018).

H6 was not supported. Our results did not support that hostile sexism would be unrelated to any MFT dimensions. The results showed that hostile sexism was significantly negatively correlated with MFT harm and negatively correlated with MFT fairness. Considering that both of these dimensions' focus on virtues of kindness, civility, and justice, it is not surprising that they are negatively correlated with hostile sexism. Again, our results agree with previous research that has indicated a positive correlation between MFT and hostile and benevolent sexism (Vecina, 2018; Vecina & Piñuela, 2017). Unlike previous studies, in which small and unrepresentative sample sizes (i.e. prisons) were used when studying the effects of MFT dimensions on sexism to possibly gain significant results, the results from our study are based on a larger and more diverse population (Vecina & Piñuela, 2017).

In summary, sexism has clear ties to religion and moral foundation ideologies. Previous research has indicated that monotheistic religions and benevolent sexism are positively related, so it is not surprising that this study has found a relationship between hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, and spirituality/religiousness. My results show how sexism is deeply rooted to MFT and spirituality/religiousness. Sexism has many predictors and correlates with ideologies, such as religion and moral foundations, and with personable qualities, such as agreeableness and openness. Concerning the prevalence of sexism and misogyny in today's culture, it is extremely important to understand the variables that influence this prejudice in order to combat it (Ibraeva & Kalizhanova, 2016). Examining the potential predictors of sexism and misogyny could aid in reducing this prejudice altogether.

The study was limited to a sample size of 261 undergraduates. Future research could be improved by surveying a more diverse community, representative of older demographics, in order to better study misogynistic attitudes. Though an attempt was made to evade bias, another limitation may have been the participants' awareness of the sexism scale being examined. The study was deceptively titled and described to be about Big Five personality traits, but participants may have deduced the true meaning for the research and attempt to alter their answers in an attempt to not identify as sexist.

Ideally, future research should include a broader population of wider age ranges could further examine the extent of the relationship between sexism and the MFT dimensions, Big Five personality traits, and spirituality/religiousness. While several results were significantly correlated within this study, a broader demographic of a wider range of ages could lead to more insight about sexism predictors.

Appendix A>>