Advanced search
Publication Cover
The Journal of Psychology
Interdisciplinary and Applied
Volume 89, 1975 - Issue 1
Submit an article Journal homepage
120
Views
108
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Are Women Still Prejudiced against Women? A Replication and Extension of Goldberg's Study

Hanna Levenson Texas A&M University and Texas A&I University, USA
,
Brent Burford Texas A&M University and Texas A&I University, USA
,
Bobbie Bonno Texas A&M University and Texas A&I University, USA
&
Loren Davis Texas A&M University and Texas A&I University, USA
Pages 67-71 | Received 23 Sep 1974, Published online: 02 Jul 2010

Citations (108)

Keep up to date with the latest research on this topic with citation updates for this article.

Subscribe to citation updates

Read on this site (6)

Elena Klaas & Mark Boukes. (2022) A woman’s got to write what a woman’s got to write: the effect of journalist’s gender on the perceived credibility of news articles. Feminist Media Studies 22:3, pages 571-587.
Read now
David Roca, Daniel Tena, Patrícia Lázaro & Alfons González. (2016) Is there gender bias when creative directors judge advertising? Name cue effect in ad evaluation. International Journal of Advertising 35:6, pages 1008-1023.
Read now
Eugenia Proctor Gerdes & Jane Hutson Kelman. (1981) Sex Discrimination: Effects of Sex-Role Incongruence, Evaluator Sex, and Stereotypes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 2:3, pages 219-226.
Read now
NancyJ. Olsen & EleanorW. Willemsen. (1978) Studying Sex Prejudice in Children. The Journal of Genetic Psychology 133:2, pages 203-216.
Read now
Shirley Clark & Mary Kay Lane. (1978) Women's Behavioral Manifestations of Traditionalist and Liberated Role Concepts. The Journal of Psychology 98:1, pages 81-89.
Read now
RichardC. Noel & MaryJ. Allen. (1976) Sex and Ethnic Bias in the Evaluation of Student Editorials. The Journal of Psychology 94:1, pages 53-58.
Read now

Articles from other publishers (102)

Onochie Fan-Osuala. (2023) Women’s online opinions are still not as influential as those of their male peers in buying decisions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 10:1.
Crossref
Chantelle Ivanski, Stacey Humphries, Karina van Dalen-Oskam & Raymond A. Mar. (2022) Do We Judge Fiction by the Author’s Gender?. Journal of Media Psychology 34:5, pages 299-312.
Crossref
Gamze ŞEN. (2021) ÇOĞULCU CEHALET VE ALGI DEĞİŞİMİ BİLEŞENLERİNİN SALDIRGANLIK ÜZERİNDEN ANLAŞILMASI: KARMA YÖNTEMLİ ÇALIŞMAUnderstanding Components of Pluralistic Ignorance and Changes in Perception through Aggression: A Mixed-Method Study. Academic Review of Humanities and Social Sciences 4:2, pages 212-240.
Crossref
Bahar Ashnai, Sudha Mani, Prabakar Kothandaraman & Saeed Shekari. (2020) Gender bias in the recruitment of entry-level B2B salespeople. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 35:8, pages 1335-1344.
Crossref
Farnaz Jahanbakhsh, Justin Cranshaw, Scott Counts, Walter S. Lasecki & Kori Inkpen. (2020) An Experimental Study of Bias in Platform Worker Ratings: The Role of Performance Quality and Gender. An Experimental Study of Bias in Platform Worker Ratings: The Role of Performance Quality and Gender.
David R. Johnson & Joseph C. Hermanowicz. 2017. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research 485 527 .
Tostain Manuel. (2016) Faut-il en finir avec les stéréotypes de sexe ? Revue de questions critique sur les études psychosociales des relations entre sexes. Bulletin de psychologie Numéro 543:3, pages 163-178.
Crossref
Lutz Bornmann. (2013) Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 45:1, pages 197-245.
Crossref
Robert B. Kean & Richard L. Dukes. (1991) Effects of witness characteristics on the perception and reportage of child abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect 15:4, pages 423-435.
Crossref
Titia J. Top. (1991) Sex bias in the evaluation of performance in the scientific, artistic, and literary professions: A review. Sex Roles 24:1-2, pages 73-106.
Crossref
Margaret E. Lloyd. (2013) GENDER FACTORS IN REVIEWER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANUSCRIPT PUBLICATION. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 23:4, pages 539-543.
Crossref
Kathryn M. Rickard. (1990) The effect of feminist identity level on gender prejudice toward artists' illustrations. Journal of Research in Personality 24:2, pages 145-162.
Crossref
Senta Troemel-Ploetz. (1990) Mileva Einstein-Marić. Women's Studies International Forum 13:5, pages 415-432.
Crossref
Richard L. Dukes & Robert B. Kean. (1989) An experimental study of gender and situation in the perception and reportage of child abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect 13:3, pages 351-360.
Crossref
Bernice Lott. (2010) The Devaluation of Women's Competence. Journal of Social Issues 41:4, pages 43-60.
Crossref
Claire Etaugh & Joanne Stern. (1984) Person perception: Effects of sex, marital status, and sex-typed occupation. Sex Roles 11:5-6, pages 413-424.
Crossref
Michael Moore. (1984) Sex and acknowledgments: A nonreactive study. Sex Roles 10:11-12, pages 1021-1031.
Crossref
Robert Geffner & Madeleine M. Gross. (1984) Sex-role behavior and obedience to authority: A field study. Sex Roles 10:11-12, pages 973-985.
Crossref
Jack P. Lipton & Alan M. Hershaft. (1984) ?Girl,? ?woman,? ?guy,? ?man?: The effects of sexist labeling. Sex Roles 10:3-4, pages 183-194.
Crossref
Thomas F. Cash & Claire A. Trimer. (1984) Sexism and beautyism in women's evaluations of peer performance. Sex Roles 10:1-2, pages 87-98.
Crossref
Liliane Tawil & Carol Costello. (1983) The perceived competence of women in traditional and nontraditional fields as a function of sex-role orientation and age. Sex Roles 9:12, pages 1197-1203.
Crossref
Alan Poling, Deborah Grossett, Barbara Fulton, Susan Roy, Susan Beechler & Connie J. Wittkopp. (2017) Participation by Women in Behavior Analysis. The Behavior Analyst 6:2, pages 145-152.
Crossref
Claire Etaugh & Sue Riley. (1983) Evaluating competence of women and men: Effects of marital and parental status and occupational sex-typing. Sex Roles 9:9, pages 943-952.
Crossref
Loraine Son & Neal Schmitt. (1983) The influence of sex bias upon compliance with expert power. Sex Roles 9:2, pages 233-246.
Crossref
Douglas P. Peters & Stephen J. Ceci. (2010) Peer-review research: Objections and obligations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 246-255.
Crossref
John Ziman. (2010) Bias, incompetence, or bad management?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 245-246.
Crossref
David Zeaman. (2010) Reliability and validity of peer review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 245-245.
Crossref
Rosalyn S. Yalow. (2010) Competency testing for reviewers and editors. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 244-245.
Crossref
Joseph C. Witt & Michael J. Hannafin. (2010) Experimenter and reviewer bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 243-244.
Crossref
William A. WilsonJrJr. (2010) Research on peer-review practices: Problems of interpretation, application, and propriety. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 242-243.
Crossref
Grover J. Whitehurst. (2010) The quandary of manuscript reviewing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 241-242.
Crossref
Murray J. White. (2010) Some procedural obscurities in Peters and Ceci's peer-review study. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 241-241.
Crossref
Garth J. Thomas. (2010) Perhaps it was right to reject the resubmitted manuscripts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 240-240.
Crossref
Sol Tax & Robert A. Rubinstein. (2010) Responsibility in reviewing and research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 238-240.
Crossref
William A. Scott. (2010) Referee report on an earlier draft of Peters and Ceci's target article. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 238-238.
Crossref
Sandra Scarr. (2010) Anosmic peer review: A rose by another name is evidently not a rose. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 237-238.
Crossref
Donald B. Rubin. (2010) Rejection, rebuttal, revision: Some flexible features of peer review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 236-237.
Crossref
Chuck Ross. (2010) Rejecting published work: Similar fate for fiction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 236-236.
Crossref
Robert Rosenthal. (2010) Reliability and bias in peer-review practices. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 235-236.
Crossref
Stanley Presser. (2010) Reviewer reliability: Confusing random error with systematic error or bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 234-235.
Crossref
Alan L. Porter. (2010) 2004: A scenario of peer review in the future. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 233-234.
Crossref
Richard M. Perloff & Robert Perloff. (2010) Improving research on and policies for peer-review practices. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 232-233.
Crossref
Daniel Perlman. (2010) Reviewer “bias”: Do Peters and Ceci protest too much?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 231-232.
Crossref
David S. Palermo. (2010) Biases, decisions and auctorial rebuttal in the peer-review process. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 230-231.
Crossref
Ray Over. (2010) What is the source of bias in peer review?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 229-230.
Crossref
Katherine Nelson. (2010) Reliability, bias, or quality: What is the issue?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 229-229.
Crossref
Michael J. Moravcsik. (2010) Rejecting published work: It couldn't happen in physics! (or could it?). Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 228-229.
Crossref
Ian I. Mitroff. (2010) Designing peer review for the subjective as well as the objective side of science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 227-228.
Crossref
Burton Mindick. (2010) When we practice to deceive: The ethics of a metascientific inquiry. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 226-227.
Crossref
Jason Millman. (2010) Making the plausible implausible: A favorable review of Peters and Ceci's target article. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 225-226.
Crossref
Clyde Manwell & C. M. Ann Baker. (2010) Reform peer review: The Peters and Ceci study in the context of other current studies of scientific evaluation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 221-225.
Crossref
Michael J. Mahoney. (2010) Publication, politics, and scientific progress. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 220-221.
Crossref
Richard T. Louttit. (2010) Peer review: Prediction of the future or judgment of the past?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 219-220.
Crossref
David Lazarus. (2010) Interreferee agreement and acceptance rates in physics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 219-219.
Crossref
Michael J. A. Howe. (2010) Peer reviewing: Improve or be rejected. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 218-219.
Crossref
David F. Horrobin. (2010) Peer review: A philosophically faulty concept which is proving disastrous for science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 217-218.
Crossref
William M. Honig. (2010) Peer review in the physical sciences: An editor's view. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 216-217.
Crossref
Robert Hogan. (2010) The insufficiencies of methodological inadequacy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 216-216.
Crossref
James Hartley. (2010) Scientific communication: So where do we go from here?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 215-216.
Crossref
Belver C. Griffith. (2010) Judging document content versus social functions of refereeing: Possible and impossible tasks. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 214-215.
Crossref
R. A. Gordon. (2010) Optional published refereeing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 213-214.
Crossref
M. D. Gordon. (2010) Cognitive relativism and peer-review bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 213-213.
Crossref
Leonard D. Goodstein. (2010) When will the editors start to edit?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 212-213.
Crossref
Norval D. Glenn. (2010) The journal article review process as a game of chance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 211-212.
Crossref
Russell G. Geen. (2010) Review bias: Positive or negative, good or bad?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 211-211.
Crossref
Joseph L. Fleiss. (2010) Deception in the study of the peer-review process. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 210-211.
Crossref
Douglas Lee Eckberg. (2010) Theoretical implications of failure to detect prepublished submissions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 209-210.
Crossref
Lois DeBakey. (2010) Authorship and manuscript reviewing: The risk of bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 208-209.
Crossref
Rick Crandall. (2010) Editorial responsibilities in manuscript review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 207-208.
Crossref
John D. Cone. (2010) Criterion problems in journal review practices. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 206-207.
Crossref
Andrew M. Colman. (2010) Manuscript evaluation by journal referees and editors: Randomness or bias?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 205-206.
Crossref
Domenic V. Cicchetti. (2010) On peer review: “We have met the enemy and he is us”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 205-205.
Crossref
Daryl E. Chubin. (2010) Reforming peer review: From recycling to reflexivity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 204-204.
Crossref
Marian Blissett. (2010) Peer review and the structure of knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 203-204.
Crossref
Janice M. Beyer. (2010) Explaining an unsurprising demonstration: High rejection rates and scarcity of space. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 202-203.
Crossref
H. Russell Bernard. (2010) Computer-assisted referee selection as a means of reducing potential editorial bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 202-202.
Crossref
Cyril Belshaw. (2010) Peer review and the Current Anthropology experience . Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 200-201.
Crossref
Donald deB. Beaver. (2010) On the failure to detect previously published research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 199-200.
Crossref
John J. Bartko. (2010) The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 199-199.
Crossref
J. Scott Armstrong. (2010) Barriers to scientific contributions: The author's formula. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 197-199.
Crossref
Robert K. Adair. (2010) A physics editor comments on Peters and Ceci's peer-review study. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 196-196.
Crossref
Douglas P. Peters & Stephen J. Ceci. (2010) Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5:2, pages 187-195.
Crossref
Catherine E. Potkay, Charles R. Potkay, Gregory J. Boynton & Julie A. Klingbeil. (1982) Perceptions of male and female comic strip characters using the Adjective Generation Technique (AGT). Sex Roles 8:2, pages 185-200.
Crossref
T. Kushnir. (1982) BUSINESS PARTNERSHIPS: SEX AND ATTRACTIVENESS STEREOTYPES. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal 10:2, pages 125-131.
Crossref
Ellyn Kaschak. (2018) Another Look at Sex Bias in Students’ evaluations of Professors: Do Winners Get the Recognition that They Have Been Given?. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5:5_suppl, pages 767-772.
Crossref
Ellyn Kaschak. (1981) Another Look at Sex Bias in Students' Evaluations of Professors.. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5:s5, pages 767-772.
Crossref
Jayne E. Stake, Elaine F. Walker & Mary V. Speno. (2016) The Relationship of Sex and Academic Performance to Quality of Recommendations for Graduate School. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5:4, pages 515-522.
Crossref
D. Andrew Ellerman, Cathleen M. Dowling, Melinda L. Hinschen, James E. Kemp & Leeanne K. White. (2016) Teachers' Evaluations of Creative Work by Children: Sexism in Australia. Psychological Reports 48:2, pages 439-446.
Crossref
Judith S. Bridges & Joseph Del Ciampo. (2016) Children's Perception of the Competence of Boys and Girls. Perceptual and Motor Skills 52:2, pages 503-506.
Crossref
Margaret J. Malchon & Louis A. Penner. (1981) The effects of sex and sex-role identity on the attribution of maladjustment. Sex Roles 7:4, pages 363-378.
Crossref
Colleen Ward. (1981) Prejudice against women: Who, when, and why?. Sex Roles 7:2, pages 163-171.
Crossref
Lynn S. Rapin & Merri-Ann Cooper. (2016) Images of Men and Women: A Comparison of Feminists and Nonfeminists. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5:2, pages 186-194.
Crossref
Madeleine M. Gross & Robert A. Geffner. (1980) Are the times changing? An analysis of sex-role prejudice. Sex Roles 6:5, pages 713-722.
Crossref
Bette Whitelock Tryon. (1980) Beliefs about male and female competence held by kindergartners and second graders. Sex Roles 6:1, pages 85-97.
Crossref
Kenneth J. Gruber & Jacquelyn Gaebelein. (1979) Sex differences in listening comprehension. Sex Roles 5:3, pages 299-310.
Crossref
Teresa Peck. (1978) When women evaluate women, nothing succeeds like success: The differential effects of status upon evaluations of male and female professional ability. Sex Roles 4:2, pages 205-213.
Crossref
Ellyn Kaschak. (2016) Sex Bias in Student Evaluations of College Professors. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2:3, pages 235-243.
Crossref
Mary V. McGuire & Gordon Bermant. (2006) Individual and Group Decisions in Response to a Mock Trial: A Methodological Note 1 . Journal of Applied Social Psychology 7:3, pages 220-226.
Crossref
Paul E. Panek, James P. Greenawalt & Michael C. Rush. (2016) Readability of the Articles Used by Goldberg. Perceptual and Motor Skills 43:3, pages 864-866.
Crossref
Joanne R. Cantor. (1976) What is Funny to Whom?. Journal of Communication 26:3, pages 164-172.
Crossref
Paul E. Panek, Robert Deitchman, Joel H. Burkholder, Ted Speroff & Richard H. Haude. (2016) Evaluation of Feminine Professional Competence as a Function of Level of Accomplishment. Psychological Reports 38:3, pages 875-880.
Crossref
George W. Johnson. 1976. 1975 Annual Supplement. 1975 Annual Supplement 1 482 .

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.