Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Difference in Male Door- Opening Behavior in Relation to Age of Male Benefactor and Sex of Beneficiary Amy Bender, Ashlee Kirk, & Sarah Scott Hanover College.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Difference in Male Door- Opening Behavior in Relation to Age of Male Benefactor and Sex of Beneficiary Amy Bender, Ashlee Kirk, & Sarah Scott Hanover College."— Presentation transcript:

1 Difference in Male Door- Opening Behavior in Relation to Age of Male Benefactor and Sex of Beneficiary Amy Bender, Ashlee Kirk, & Sarah Scott Hanover College Fall 2005

2 Introduction America moving towards gender equality, but gender roles still observable America moving towards gender equality, but gender roles still observable Generational differences in door-holding Generational differences in door-holding –Fengler & Wood, 1972; Twenge, 1997 Social movements effects on door-holding Social movements effects on door-holding –Womens movement (Twenge, 1997) –Benevolent sexism (Yoder, Hogue, Newman, Mertz, & LaVigne, 2002)

3 Hypothesis Age of Benefactor Age of Benefactor –Older men more likely to open the door for women than younger men Sex of Beneficiary Sex of Beneficiary –Men more likely to open the door for women than other men

4 Methods Observed 28 subjects in natural setting Observed 28 subjects in natural setting Inter-rater reliability: 0.5 Inter-rater reliability: 0.5 –Judgements between both observers never differed by more than 5 years Madison, IN and HC Campus Center in early evening Madison, IN and HC Campus Center in early evening Definition of door-opening Definition of door-opening Recorded men who had potential to open door Recorded men who had potential to open door Recorded sex of beneficiary & age of benefactor Recorded sex of beneficiary & age of benefactor

5 Results Found men who opened the door were significantly younger (M=20.75) than men who did not open the door (M=34.63). According to a t-test adjusted for inequality of variances, this relationship was significant, t(25.72)=3.14, p=.004. Found men who opened the door were significantly younger (M=20.75) than men who did not open the door (M=34.63). According to a t-test adjusted for inequality of variances, this relationship was significant, t(25.72)=3.14, p=.004. Door Holding Behavior Age of Benefactor

6 Results, contd. 4 of the 28 cases were dropped for analysis 4 of the 28 cases were dropped for analysis Men rarely opened doors but when they did, they opened them more for women Men rarely opened doors but when they did, they opened them more for women Although more females had the door opened for them (M=0.2) than males (M=0.0), these results were not significant according to Fishers exact test, p=1.0. Although more females had the door opened for them (M=0.2) than males (M=0.0), these results were not significant according to Fishers exact test, p=1.0.

7 Discussion Age of Benefactor Age of Benefactor –Lack of older subjects Location of observation Location of observation –Non-existence of generation gap E. Thomas, 1974 E. Thomas, 1974

8 Discussion Sex of Beneficiary –B–B–B–Benevolent Sexism J.D. Yoder, M. Hogue, R. Newman, L. Mertz, and T. Lavigne, 2002 Limitations of location –E–E–E–Economic Class Differences M.D. Smith and L.J. Fisher, 1982

9 Further Research Limit observation to beneficiary directly Limit observation to beneficiary directly Examine a different definition of door holding Examine a different definition of door holding


Download ppt "Difference in Male Door- Opening Behavior in Relation to Age of Male Benefactor and Sex of Beneficiary Amy Bender, Ashlee Kirk, & Sarah Scott Hanover College."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google