Skip to main content
Log in

Confirmation Bias and the Sexual Double Standard

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In contemporary Western societies it is widely believed that there is a sexual double standard such that men are rewarded for sexual activity, whereas women are derogated for sexual activity. This pervasive belief may result in a confirmation bias such that people tend to notice information that confirms the double standard and fail to notice information that refutes it. Two studies were conducted to test this hypothesis. In both studies, participants read vignettes about a target man or a woman that contained an equal number of positive and negative comments regarding the target's sexuality. Participants recalled more information consistent with the double standard than inconsistent with it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aubrey, J. S. (2004). Sex and punishment: An examination of sexual consequences and the sexual double standard in teen programming. Sex Roles, 50, 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. (1991). Beliefs about thinking. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 169–186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2003). Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 13–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fraley, R. C., Garner, J. P., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult attachment and the defensive regulation of attention and memory: The role of preemptive and postemptive processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 816–826.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gentry, M. (1998). The sexual double standard. The influence of number of relationships and level of sexual activity on judgments of women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 505–511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hird, M. J., & Jackson, S. (2001). Where “angels” and “wusses” fear to tread: Sexual coercion in adolescent dating relationships. Journal of Sociology, 37, 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, A. P., & Williams, J. D. (1985). Effects of premarital sexual standards and behavior on dating and marriage desirability. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 1059–1065.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, M. M., & Miller, M. L. (1986). The effects of sexual permissiveness, target gender, subject gender, and attitude toward women on social perception: In search of the double standard. Sex Roles, 15, 311–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, M. J. (2002). [Internet survey of attitudes of sexual freedom.] Unpublished raw data.

  • Marks, M. J., & Fraley, R. C. (2005a). The sexual double standard: Fact or fiction? Sex Roles, 52, 175–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks, M. J., & Fraley, R. C. (2005b). The impact of social interaction on the sexual double standard. Manuscript under review.

  • Milhausen, R. R., & Herold, E. S. (1999). Does the sexual double standard still exist? Perceptions of university women. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 361–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milhausen, R. R., & Herold, E. S. (2001). Reconceptualizing the sexual double standard. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 13, 63–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • MTV Networks Music. (2003, August 18). Fight for your rights: Busting the double standard [Television broadcast]. New York: MTV Networks Music.

  • Nickerson, R. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. B., & Sedikides, C. (1992). Effects of sexual permissiveness on desirability of a partner as a function of low and high commitment to relationship. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 321–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Sullivan, L. F. (1995). Less is more: The effects of sexual experience on judgments of men's and women's personality characteristics and relationship desirability. Sex Roles, 33, 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1987). Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 297–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skov, R. B., & Sherman, S. J. (1986). Information-gathering processes: Diagnosticity, hypothesis-confirmatory strategies, and perceived hypothesis confirmation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 93–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, M., & Campbell, B. H. (1980). Testing hypotheses about other people: The role of the hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 421–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1977). Unpublished data, University of Minnesota.

  • Snyder, M., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1978). Hypothesis-testing processes in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1202–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprecher, S. (1989). Premarital sexual standards for different categories of individuals. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 232–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprecher, S., McKinney, K., & Orbuch, T. L. (1987). Has the double standard disappeared?: An experimental test. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprecher, S., McKinney, K., Walsh, R., & Anderson, C. (1988). A revision of the Reiss Premarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 821–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenbaum, L. (2000). Slut! New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, D. M., Wenzlaff, R., Kerker, R. M., & Beattie, A. E. (1981). Incrimination through innuendo: Can media questions become public answers? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 822–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, E. (2002). Fast girls: Teenage tribes and the myth of the slut. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Marks.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marks, M.J., Fraley, R.C. Confirmation Bias and the Sexual Double Standard. Sex Roles 54, 19–26 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-8866-9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-8866-9

Key Words

Navigation