Evidence-based ideas for developing communications campaigns and the messaging within them.
Combatting sexism or any form of bias is complex. Different policies and interventions may be more or less effective depending on context.
There are no guarantees that a particular approach will work in a given scenario. However, research evidence can provide pointers as to approaches that can be effective.
The following principles have been developed from a review of the evidence. Some of them will seem like common sense, while others may be less obvious. In all cases, there is evidence to suggest that these principles may be helpful in combatting sexist behaviours in some contexts. They can be viewed as a menu that can be used to provide ideas for developing communication campaigns and the messaging contained within them.
Knowledge, understanding and skills
Knowledge, understanding and skills can be built into messaging by:
- correcting a tendency among male officers and staff to overestimate the frequency of behaviour displayed by their colleagues that is sexist, and the sense that these behaviours are more ‘normal’ than they are (Kilmartin and others, 2008)
- ensuring that the audience clearly understands the rules and standards that operate in their setting (Paluck and Green, 2009)
- providing insight into the negative impact of sexist behaviour (Becker and Swim, 2011)
- emphasising how gender equality benefits everyone – for example, by improving workplace performance (Nolan, Moran and Kotschwar, 2016; Herring, 2009)
- encouraging dialogue and open conversations to foster understanding (Kalev, Dobbin and Kelly, 2006; Ely and Meyerson, 2000)
- incorporating gender issues into broader training (Wood and Lenze, 1991)
- ensuring that the context in which anti-bias training takes place is supportive and non-blaming (Legate and others, 2023)
- demonstrating how to challenge sexist behaviour and model the use of assertive language (Wood and Lenze, 1991; Bingham, 1991; European Institute for Gender Equality, 2023)
- ensuring that those witnessing or experiencing sexist behaviours feel empowered and supported to come forward and assert their rights (McDonald, 2012)
Motivation
Motivation can be built into messaging by:
- highlighting positive examples of gender equality and respectful behaviour (Lockwood, 2006), recognising that the majority of people do not instigate or condone this behaviour, and showcasing individuals and organisations that exemplify positive behaviour (Sprague, 1975)
- connecting to values held by the target audience, such as fairness, professionalism and justice (Bicchieri and Chavez, 2010; Haidt)
- conveying respect and empathy for the audience’s perspectives while encouraging them to reflect on biases (Czopp and Monteith, 2003)
- refraining from using shaming or blaming tactics, as they can lead to defensive reactions (Czopp and Monteith, 2003; Dickerson, Gruenewald and Kemeny, 2006; Gausel and Leach, 2011)
- including statements from organisational leaders that are clear and consistent with messaging from other sources (Buchanan and others, 2014)
- involving communities and stakeholders in developing and promoting messages, so that there is a sense of ownership (Laverack, 2006; Bohnet, 2016)
- considering tailoring messaging to specific groups and contexts for maximum relevance (Acker, 1990)
References
- Kilmartin C, Smith T, Green A, Heinzen H, Kuchler M and Kolar D. (2008). ‘A real time social norms intervention to reduce male sexism’. Sex Roles, 59, pp 264–273.
- Paluck EL and Green DP. (2009). ‘Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice’. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, pp 339–367.
- Becker JC and Swim JK. (2011). Seeing the unseen: Attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(2), pp 227–242. [Accessed 10 November 2023]
- Noland M, Moran T and Kotschwar BR. (2016). ‘Is gender diversity profitable? Evidence from a global survey’. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper No. 16-3.
- Herring C. (2009). ‘Does diversity pay?: Race, gender, and the business case for diversity’. American Sociological Review, 74(2), pp 208–224.
- Kalev A, Dobbin F and Kelly E. (2006). ‘Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies’. American Sociological Review, 71(4), pp 589–617.
- Ely RJ and Meyerson DE. (2000). ‘Theories of gender in organizations: A new approach to organizational analysis and change’. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, pp 103–151.
- Wood JT and Lenze LF. (1991). ‘Strategies to enhance gender sensitivity in communication education’. Communication Education, 40(1), pp 16–21.
- Legate N, Weinstein N, Graham L and Plater M. (2023). ‘Anti-bias training and perceived force climate: Links with prejudiced attitudes in United Kingdom policing’. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 33(4), pp 929–939.
- Bingham SG. (1991). ‘Communication strategies for managing sexual harassment in organizations: Understanding message options and their effects’. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 19, pp 88–115.
- European Institute for Gender Equality. (2023). How can I combat sexism? A ten-step programme for managers[internet]. [Accessed 1 November 2023]
- McDonald P. (2012). ‘Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: A review of the literature’. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1), pp 1–17.
- Lockwood P. (2006). ‘“Someone like me can be successful”: Do college students need same-gender role models?’ Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), pp 36–46.
- Sprague J. (1975). ‘The reduction of sexism in speech communication education’. The Speech Teacher, 24, pp 37–45.
- Bicchieri C and Chavez A. (2010). ‘Behaving as expected: Public information and fairness norms’. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, pp 161–178.
- Haidt J. The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316(5827), pp 998–1002 [internet]. [Accessed 10
November 2023] - Czopp AM and Monteith MJ. (2003). ‘Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias’. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, pp 532–544.
- Dickerson SS, Gruenewald TL and Kemeny ME. (2004). ‘When the social self is threatened: Shame, physiology, and health’. Journal of Personality, 72(6), pp 1191–1216.
- Gausel N and Leach CW. (2011). ‘Concern for self-image and social image in the management of moral failure: Rethinking shame’. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(4), pp 468–478.
- Buchanan NT, Settles IH, Hall AT and O’Connor RC. (2014). ‘A review of organizational strategies for reducing sexual harassment: Insights from the U. S. military’. Journal of Social Issues, 70(4), pp 687–702.
- Laverack G. ‘Improving health outcomes through community empowerment: A review of the literature’. (2006). Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 24(1), pp 113–120.
- Bohnet I. (2016). ‘What works: Gender equality by design’. London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- Acker J. (1990). ‘Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations’. Gender & Society, 4(2), pp 139–158.