Content area
Full text
Despite documented, negative effects of sexist language, some people still strongly oppose inclusive language. Their attitudes need study, but existing measures of attitude lack comprehensiveness or validity. This paper reports construction and validation of the 42-item Inventory of Attitudes Toward Sexist/Nonsexist Language (IASNL), which is based on a conceptual framework related to beliefs about language, recognition of sexist language, and willingness to use inclusive language. Four studies tested the IASNL's content validity (9 content experts, 329 other participants), construct validity, and reliability (31 advocates of inclusive language, 298 additional respondents). Cronbach alphas were high and validity measures were strong. Two short forms of the IASNL were also created-the IASNL-General and the IASNLSport. The IASNL-General is in the Appendix.
Sexist language has been defined as "words, phrases, and expressions that unnecessarily differentiate between females and males or exclude, trivialize, or diminish either gender" (Parks & Roberton,1998a, p. 455). Theoretically, sexist language could have deleterious effects on either women or men, but empirical evidence in American society strongly suggests that the preponderance of negative results accrue to women. Concern about the negative effects of sexist language is grounded in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity, which suggests an affinity between language and culture (Cameron,1985; Carroll,1956; Simpson,1993; Thorne, Kramarae, & Henley,1983). The strong version of this hypothesis maintains that language directly causes particular behaviors in members of a culture. The moderate version holds that culture and language are intertwined such that the meanings people ascribe to language affect their realities, their self-concepts, and their world views (Bing,1992; Lakoff, 1973; Miller & Swift, 1988; Parks & Roberton, 1998a, 1998b). Although research has not supported the strong version (Bing, 1992), evidence for the moderate version has been provided. Studies have revealed that pseudogeneric pronouns and job titles (e.g., he, mailman) (a) imply the superiority of the masculine over the feminine (Gastil, 1990; Hyde, 1984), (b) produce masculine images or confusion in the receivers' minds (Bodine, 1975; Hamilton, 1988; Khosroshahi, 1989; Kidd,1971; Martyna,1978; McConnell & Fazio,1996; Merritt & Kok,1995; Moulton, Robinson, & Elias, 1978; Schneider & Hacker, 1973; Stericker, 1981), and (c) have an effect on the self-concepts of women and men (MacKay, 1980; Nilsen, 1977). Scholars have also suggested that negative effects can result from the use of other...