Sociology help

Gender Issues in Advertising Language Nancy Artz, Jeanne Munger, Warren Purdy

The portrayal of gender in advertising has received considerable attention over the last several decades, both by practitioners and academics. Research has primarily focused on the visual portrayal of women in advertising (see Ferguson, Kreshel, & Tinkham 1990, Bellizzi & Milner 1991). Although far from conclusive, evidence suggests that vestiges of sexism remain (c.f.. Ford & LaTour 1993), with improvements noted in the direction of more respectful portrayal of women in U.S. advertising (Pieraccini & Schell 1995). Counterexamples to these improvements abound. In a review of the 1999 Superbowl ads, Garfield (1999) unequivocally stated:

"After three decades of gradually weaning itself from naked objectification, advertising has apparently decided that the benefit of crudely impressing men trumps the disadvantages of dishonoring women. It's as if Madison Avenue sneaked into the nation's psyche and absconded with 30 years of feminist awareness." (p. 1)

So much for progress.

Sexism In Advertising

Sexism in the portrayal of women in advertising has been studied in a variety of different cultures including the United States, Australia, Britain, Italy, India, Japan and Kenya. A number of broad patterns in the portrayal of women can be discerned from this body of evidence. Women are more often portrayed as young and concerned with physical attractiveness than their male counterparts (Ford, Vooli, Honneycutt, & Casey 1998, Gilly 1988, Lysonski 1985, Mazzella, Durkin, Cerini, & Buralli 1992). Women are less likely than men are to be portrayed as authority figures and more likely to be shown as product users (Bretl & Cantor 1988, Furnham & Voli 1989, Gilly 1988, Livingstone & Green 1986, Mazzella, Durkin, Cerini, & Buralli 1992, Mwangi 1996). Furthermore, there is a tendency for women to be shown as subordinate to men, as decorative objects, or as alluring sex objects (Ferguson, Kreshel, & Tinkham 1990, Griffin, Viswanath & Schwartz 1994, Kilbourne 1987, Lysonski 1985, Sengupta 1995, Wyckham 1987, Wyckham 1993). Particularly disturbing is the contention that "Western advertising conventions are being transferred cross- culturally in conjunction with the transfer of institutions and technology" (Griffin, Viswanath & Schwartz 1994, p. 503). With the transfer of those conventions, it seems, comes sexism.

Studies indicate this occurs even among young audiences. Furnham, Abramsky and Gunter (1997), for example, found that male children were more likely to appear in television advertisements, even when the product was targeting girls. Browne (1998) found that U.S. and

Australian ads contained more male figures than female figures, substantiating some degree of gender stereotyping. These results highlight another concern, the cultivation of sex stereotyping among children (Furnham & Bitar 1993), which perpetuates problems associated with gender-bias.

In contrast, sex bias, as evidenced in advertising language, has received less attention. Most of the reported findings relate to the use of male or female voice-overs. Typical of the findings is that men have been found to be overwhelmingly present as voice-overs in U.S. television advertisements even when the central figure is a woman (Courtney & Whipple 1974, Furnham & Bitar 1993). Pieraccini and Schell (1995), however, found evidence to the contrary, that female voice-overs are increasing, there is very little sexist language, and women are equally present on camera and in speaking roles. Studies of U.S., British and Australian children's advertising found that male voice-overs were more prevalent than female voice- overs (Browne 1998), even when boys and girls were equally represented in the advertisements themselves (Furnham, Abramsky & Gunter 1997). Sengupta (1995) found that female voice-overs were used more frequently in Japanese as in U.S. commercials, attributing it to recent changes in marketing strategy which targeted young, Japanese "office ladies" with greater levels of disposable income. Cheng (1997) found that male voice-overs were equally prominent in Chinese as in U.S. ads. Given broad concern about gender bias in language, the failure to expand beyond the sex of voice-overs in advertising is noteworthy. Furthermore, as advertising assumes an increasing role in the socialization process in developing countries, the impact of advertising messages becomes a significant concern with far-reaching impact.

Gender Issues In Language

Every utterance or piece of text can be categorized as gender-neutral, gender-specific, or gender-biased. Gender-neutral language either has no reference to gender (e.g., "someone") or it simultaneously refers to both genders (e.g., "women and men," "his or her," or "s/he"). Gender-specific language refers to one of the two genders in a non-biased way. For example a male spokesperson could be referred to as "he." Gender-bias can take a variety of forms in language. It may include language that excludes one gender (e.g., "the average man" when used to refer to "people"), convey unsupported or biased connotations (e.g., "doctors spend little time with their wives" rather than spouses), or imply or contain irrelevant evaluation of gender (e.g., "the little woman").'

Likewise, advertising language incorporates gender in a gender-neutral, gender-specific, or gender-biased manner. For example, a Cutty Sark advertisement used gender-neutral language: "You can usually tell how eager someone is to receive a gift by the way they open it."

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2, Page 20

Bausch & Lomb advertised an oral hygiene product by picturing stereo headphones and a toothbrush and using gender-biased language: "How can a person who puts high technology on his head put low technology in his mouth?" [italics added] A reverse form of gender-bias was observed in a Wall Street Journal ad that used "she" as a generic pronoun instead of "he": "Give your kid the business. Whether she's interested in marketing..."

Although a thorough assessment of gender-bias in advertising language has not been reported to date, the extent of gender-bias in other forms of language has been investigated. The language in corporate annual reports is essentially bias-free (Newsom 1988) as is American Psychological Association (APA) journal writing (c.f.. Prentice 1994). In contrast, 48% of articles in the accounting literature were found to have APA violations even though the Accounting Society guidelines require neutral language (Hicks & Hull 1991). Other language vehicles such as newspapers, magazines, in-house employee publications, and speeches by male business leaders have improved markedly over the years but still include gender-biased language (Cooper 1984, Fasold 1988, Garrett-Cline & Masel-Walters 1983, Rubin, Greene, & Schneider 1994). These fmdings indicate that the extent of gender-biased language varies substantially by language forum.

Techniques For Achieving Gender Neutral Language

The literature has examined both the nature of existing gender-bias as well as the techniques used to avoid gender- bias. One of the most intractable forms of gender-bias includes occupational titles ending in -man (Cooper 1984, Fasold 1988, & Rubin, Greene, & Schneider 1994). Although unintended, this results in the omission of women. This ambiguity can cause misunderstanding that has a discriminatory impact. In many cases this can be resolved by a simple substitution of a more universal term (humanity for mankind) or recasting the wording into the plural (people for men).

When individuals report difficulty in avoiding masculine generic pronouns, their most common strategy to avoid this problem is the grammatically problematic practice of replacing generic "he" with singular "they" (Harrigan & Lucic 1988). Consistent with this, a study of pronoun use in TV talk shows found that the masculine generic "he" was used in 28% of the occasions when a pronoun referred to a singular antecedent of unknown gender whereas singular "they" was used in 59% of the occasions (Newman 1992).

Although somewhat awkward, another approach is to use "she or he," "his or her" and "him or her" when the use of a pronoun is necessary, although expressions such as "he or she" are rarely used extemporaneously (Newman 1992).

Context also impacts the use of gendered language. Different gender-neutral writing techniques appear to be used in formal versus informal language. Formal speech is

more likely to use plurals or "he or she," while informal speech uses singular "they" (Martyna 1978, Rubin, Greene & Schneider 1994).

Finally, strong individual differences exist in people's preferences for various gender-neutral writing techniques (Rubin & Greene 1991). In general, women tend to produce less gender-biased language than men. Women tend to use the pronoun "one" while men tend toward generics and conjoined male/female terms (Rubin, Greene & Schneider 1994). Although women don't use much gender-biased language, they don't frequently use obvious techniques to achieve gender-neutrality such as using the singular "they," "one," conjoined terms (male/female), or generics (Rubin, Greene & Schneider 1994).

Industrv Responses To Sexism In Language

Style books, publishers, and scholarly organizations have been calling for the elimination of biased language since the 1970s (Wattman, Treichler & Treichler 1989). Numerous style manuals have been published to guide the use of language across a number of different disciplines. Guidelines are available for use in eliminating sex bias in written language (Miller 1988, Schwartz 1995). Media writers use style manuals such as the Associated Press Stylebook or the New York Times Stylebook. Practitioners have issued similar calls in the business press (Boyd, Lewis & Butler 1988). Yet, explicit, formal standards to discourage the use of sex bias in advertising language are few.

In response to growing concerns about sexism in advertising, the National Advertising Review Board (NARB) convened a panel over two decades ago to investigate and report on advertising portraying or directed toward women. This resulted in a set of guidelines relating to language in advertising (Miller, Carpenter, Claggett, Heckel, & Nelson 1975). Its formal recommendations included a checklist explicitly relating to language usage:

• Does my ad use belitding language? For example, "gal Friday" or "lady professor?" Or "her kitchen" but "his car?" Or "women's chatter" but "men's discussions?"

• Does my ad make use of contemptuous phrases? Such as "the weaker sex," "the little woman," "the ball and chain," or "the war department."

• Is there double entendre in my ads? Particularly about sex or women's bodies?

• Does my copy promise unrealistic psychological rewards for using the product? For example, that a perfume can lead to instant romance? (Miller, Carpenter, Claggett, Heckel, & Nelson 1975, p. 16-17)

Canada followed suite with its own set of guidelines recommended by its Task Force on Sex-Role Stereotyping in the Broadcast Media (Canadian Government Publishing Centre 1982, Canadian Radio-Television and

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2: Page 21

Telecommunications Commission 1986). Buttle (1989) surmised that the 1975 NARB report was a "...defense mechanism against the imposition of regulatory public policy controls." (p. 12). Whether a defense mechanism or a genuine attempt to mitigate the incidence of sexism and stereotyping of women in advertising, research generally indicates improvement in at least some aspects of the portrayal of women in advertising.

Although advertisers have sought advice on perceptions of sexism,^ since the release of these two reports very little formal guidance relating specifically to use of gender-neutral language in advertising has come into the public domain from governmental agencies, industry groups, private marketing organizations, advertising agencies or advertising media. The call by Lazier-Smith (1989): ' T o break the cycle we must change either the message or the message makers or both." (p.247) so many years after these industry reports were released reveals the persistent nature of the problem. Research assessing the state of gender-bias in advertising language is likewise sparse. The extent to which gender-bias language exists in advertising, therefore, and the degree to which it has changed over time is not known.

Advertising Language And Gender Neutrality

There are several reasons to expect that ads will contain gender-neutral language or innocuous gender- specific language. Advertisers are undoubtedly sensitive to the attitudinal changes resulting from the effects of the women's movement. The NARB and the Canadian Advertising Advisory Board standards for advertising language are available for use. Furthermore, advertisers are loath to offend potential customers, and advertising copy is carefully created and undergoes multiple processes for editing.

On the other hand, there are reasons why advertising language might incorporate gender-biased language. The findings of Martyna (1978) and Rubin, Greene & Schneider (1994) suggest that advertisements with different levels of language formality (e.g., product endorsements by an announcer vs. dialogue-based slice-of- life commercials) may vary in the use of gendered language. Broadcast advertisers may purposefully reflect natural speech patterns, and it is well documented that people use gender-biased language in everyday speech. This can reinforce inappropriate forms of address (honey, sweetie, dear), negative stereotypes (men talk, women chatter), discriminatory use of adjectives (outspoken man, bitchy woman), or derogatory labels (chick, babe, stud, hunk). Conversational dialogue in broadcast advertisements may be especially likely to include gender- biased language, because informal speech generates more gender-biased language than formal speech (Rubin, Greene & Schneider 1994).

Another reason to expect gender-biased language in ads is that not all mass-media writers have been sensitized to gender-bias in language. Conversely, some argue that

gender neutrality has been taken too far (Boroson 1993, Chelin 1991 as cited in Ehrlich & King 1992). Although the checklist in the 1975 NARB report provided guidelines for nonsexist language in advertising, neither the American advertising industry nor the three major networks have formally adopted gender-neutral writing guidelines in their published standards for television advertising. Even if individual advertisers are sensitive to the issue, avoiding biased language can seem awkward at first because aspects of biased language are structurally embedded in the English language (e.g., masculine generics and gender- based suffixes such as "waitress").

Longstanding stereotypes conjure up specific images and perceptions in the minds of consumers. As a result, advertisers may gravitate toward communicating a clear message about brand benefits at the expense of achieving gender-neutrality in language. Furthermore, when faced with ambiguous information, message receivers make stereotypical inferences relating to gender. One study found that college students used at least one gender-biased pronoun when writing essays about unknown individuals with stereotypical masculine or feminine occupations such as business executives or nurses (McMinn, Lindsay, Hannum, & Troyer 1990).

Finally, ads directed toward men and women may differ in the way gender is incorporated into the language. (Rubin, Greene & Schneider 1994). This may be further exacerbated by the predominant use of male voice-overs.

Gender Bias In Television Advertising

Artz and Munger (1996) conducted an exploratory examination of gender issues in television commercials. Television media provides stimuli richly varied in the range of visual portrayal of women and both oral and textual advertising language, and allowed for the measurement of a number of variables within one study, (see the Table for a summary of variables and their measures) Furthermore, the congruity or contrast of text, pictures and the spoken word in television advertising could attenuate the impact of the content.

Artz, Munger & Purdy (1999) reported sex role stereotyping primarily in the visual depiction of models, although stereotypical sex roles did exist in the ad language. The speech in the ads was primarily male, providing support for the criticism that television advertising has made little progress toward achieving balance in the use of the female and male voice. Excluding those involving proper names, the majority of ads were gender-neutral in that they contained no gender-linked pronouns, nominal phrases, or exclamations. Although they found gender-specific language (e.g., a gender-linked pronoun like "she" was used to refer to a female character or female person) a small proportion contained gender- biased language. When gendered language occurred, it tended to be male. Most of the gender-biased ads were derogatory toward women (i.e., "rotten witch") but derogation occurred with both male and female references.

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2, Page 22

TABLE Variables and Coding Categories

General Characteristics of the Advertisement Broadcast time slot Sex of target audience Sex of product user Gender-image of brand Product category

Product type

Nature of the Speech Used Source of speech

Sex of primary speakers Type of speech Addressee of speech

Gender Reference in the Language Used Presence of gendered language Gender of language Order in naming women and men

[daytime/nighttime] [male/both/female] [male/both/female] [masculine/neutral/feminine] [food, snacks, soda/personal and beauty care/automobile and accessories/ restaurants and retail outlets/drugs and medicines/household appliance, furnishings/institutional, public service/alcoholic beverages/pet food and related products/household cleaning agents/clothing/finance and real estate/recreation, sport, entertainment/travel/others] [consumer disposable/consumer durable/consumer service/business service/nonprofit/corporate institutional/public service/other]

[off-camera announcer or narrator/character or spokesperson/combination of announcer, narrator, character or spokesperson/singing/other] [male/both/female] [monologue/some dialogue or implied conversation/singing] [individual viewer /character in ad or mass audience]

[gender-neutral/gender-specific/gender biased] [none/male/female/both] [none/men first/women first/varied order]

Techniques Used to Achieve Gender-Neutral Copy Reference to both sexes, e.g. "she or he" Use of plural nouns and pronouns Use of plural pronoun with singular noun

[no/yes] [no/yes] [no/yes]

One ad inappropriately used a sex-specific term to refer to both sexes. The ad included the phrase "Dirt Devil is man's best friend." [italics added] Three ads used a designation that reinforced questionable assumptions about sex roles. One ad showed a little girl in muddy clothes while a background singer sang "mamma lifts them [stains] off with A-L-L." [italics added] Another ad stated that if one wants "the world's best thief, the man to watch is the Hawk." An ad for the movie Backdraft quoted a movie critic who said "It'll do for firemen what Top Gun did for pilots." [italics added] These ads reinforce traditional sex role stereotypes that housekeepers are women while thieves and fire fighters are men.

No individual ads referred to a woman with her husband's name. The ads as a group, however, had a male bias. Men tended to be named before women (a male movie actor was named before a female actor, a male television news anchor was named before the female

anchor, and a fictitious name of a male character was mentioned before the name of the female character). The only ad that referred to a woman first was for a brand of soap that "cleans baby parts ... mama parts ...and... papa parts."

Other ads used stereotypical adjectives/names for men and women or negative stereotyping. A Mercury Tracer ad included the background song "Pretty Woman." In ad for Raid Ant and Roach Killer, an animated bug call a real woman "babe." An ad for Days of Our Lives soap opera referred to a woman as a "rotten-witch...scrum-buzzard daughter of the Devil." An ad for Eagle's snack food referred to a man as a "video freak" and "geek." An ad for the television show called one of the show's female characters a "beauty queen," and a male character a "ladies' man." This last ad did have a reverse stereotype in that another male character was called a "space cadet."

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2 Page 23

An analysis was conducted to identify the types of writing techniques used to avoid gendered language, especially gender-bias language that results from the gendered nature of singular pronouns in English. Consistent use of plural pronouns and nouns was a frequent technique employed, although the evidence suggested it was not consciously selected to avoid the biased aspect of singular pronouns. The writing technique of always referring to both sexes by saying "he or she," "women and men," or "he/she" was not employed in any of the ads, and the use of a plural pronoun to refer to a singular noun, discouraged by some grammarians, was used once. (Each person is so important to us, it's like the whole [Jenny Craig] program was designed just for them.)

The type of language did not vary by the sex of the target audience, the sex of the product user, the gender- image of the brand, the product type, or the addressee of the speech. Gender-biased language, however, was more prevalent in night-time television than day-time television. This contrasts with the finding by Craig (1992) that primetime advertisements represent a more sophisticated and balanced portrayal of gender (p.2O9). One interpretation is since day-time television audiences are predominately female, advertisers are more careful with their language than in the evening when audiences are mixed.

Both gender-specific language and gender-biased language were more prevalent in ads for household cleaning products and entertainment products than in ads for other types of products. Both gender-specific language and gender-biased language were more prevalent when the speech in the ad was at least partially attributed to a person/character in the ad rather than when the speech was entirely attributed to an announcer/narrator. This suggests that relatively formal, nonconversational speech (i.e., monologues delivered by announcers) is most likely to be gender-neutral. When speech is presented in a song or as part of a conversation delivered by characters in an ad, it has a higher incidence of gender-specific and gender- biased speech, thus reflecting the inadvertent impact of the popular culture.

General Discussion And Call For Research

The majority of ads do not exhibit gender bias, although gender bias exists within the medium of television. Bias is more evident in ad pictures than in ad language. Within language, bias is more evident in songs and dialogue than in formal speech or when popular culture is involved. For example, bias sneaks in through the use of idiomatic expressions (man's best friend) and when the language refer to characters that depict traditional sex roles.

One's normative interpretation of these results depends on one's ideological perspective and tolerance for the pace of change. It is encouraging that the limited study of language in advertising indicates that the use of gender- neutrality is commonplace. Advertisers can still reduce the

stereotyping in ad pictures, and increase the amount of female speech relative to male speech, even though progress is evidenced. To the extent that advertisers prefer to speak to people in their own language, the bias present in popular culture will likely continue to be reflected in advertisements.

A concern for use of gender-neutral language can be made on a number of grounds. A moral argument can be made for the elimination of biased-language because it results in women being ignored, deprecated, or negatively stereotyped (Henley 1989). Stereotypical portrayals of women can have a detrimental impact in a number of areas. Women's exposure to gender stereotyping in advertising is thought to have a negative effect on self- concept, achievement aspirations and self image (Geis, Brown, Walstedt & Porter 1984, Jennings-Walstedt, Geis & Brown 1980, Moschis & Moore 1982). Portraying women as adornment or sex objects strips women of their individual identities, causing others to view them as "things," objects of male sexual desire, and/or part of the merchandise rather than people (Bem 1993).

Furthermore, there is concern that advertising stereotyping can have a major influence on the sex role development of children since media exposure affects cognitive development, attitude formation and change, and socialization (Buttle 1989). Because the use of stereotypical portrayals is equally manifested in advertising directed toward children, it further propagates these gender stereotypes.

Likewise, research indicates that sexist language, by itself, can produce negative consequences. Research indicates that it suggests superiority of the masculine over the feminine (Gastil 1990, Hyde 1984). Moreover, it creates confusion (McConnell & Fazio 1996, Merritt & Kok 1995). Support is mounting for the elimination of biased-language because it results in women being ignored, deprecated, or negatively stereotyped, (see Henley 1989, for a summary) To the extent that advertising contains sexist language, it can have the same negative impact as other forms of communication, further exacerbating the negative impact of other stereotypical stimuli contained in the message.

Very little research has been conducted relating to the main effects of modality of gendered language, that is, gendered language that is written as opposed to spoken, and vice versa. Furthermore, investigations of the interaction of spoken and written language (Tavassoli 1998) can provide insight into the extent to which this interaction attenuates or diminishes the impact of sex- biased language in advertising. The fact that advertising language is an integral part of the entire advertising message further highlights the importance of further research on sex-biased language in advertising.

Pragmatic arguments can also be made for the elimination of biased language in advertising. Pitt (1994) argues that the neutrality of language in corporate communications is a quality issue that reflects on the firm's relationship with its customers, employees, and the public.

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2, Page 24

Equitable treatment of women in corporate communications has been shown to enhance attitudes toward the firm (Kuiper 1988) whereas negative role portrayals can lead to negative company image and purchase intentions by some segments (Ford & LaTour 1993). Ford & LaTour (1993) conclude that avoiding negative perceptual effects through tapping the perceptions of segments of women consumers is worth the investment.

From an information processing framework, MacKenzie, Lutz, and Belch (1986) demonstrated that brand cognitions lead to brand attitudes, and that affective reactions to an ad influence brand attitudes. Affective reactions impact attitudes both direcUy and indirectly, in the latter case by changing cognitions about the brand. Although some segments of consumers are apathetic about biased language, it can be especially offensive to important customer segments, leading to negative perceptions about the brand. In general, concern about sexism in language is greater for women, those with more liberal attitudes toward women, baby boomers compared to generation X'ers, and androgynous individuals compared to instrumental individuals (Murdock & Donelson 1985, Rubin & Greene 1991). More educated, socially-conscious segments of women serve as opinion leaders for the purchase of a number of product categories and are especially averse to supporting companies using negative role portrayals (Ford, LaTour & Lundstrom 1991).

When it comes to the depiction of women in sexy ways, women especially perceive them more negatively than men (Jones, Stanaland & Gelb 1998). Women portrayed as sex objects or adornment are reduced to "body parts" instead of whole persons. Ads replete with chest, leg, buttock, and crotch shots are criticized as fostering female stereotypes and images that women are things rather than individuals (Hall, Iijima & Crum 1994).

Survey data indicates that most individuals are sensitive to the existence of gender-biased language and have made some effort to reform their speech patterns (Harrigan & Lucic 1988, Rubin & Greene 1991). It presents both a challenge and an opportunity for future research to isolate the effects of the gender-specificity in advertising language from other aspects of gender positioning in advertising. Given the tremendous impact of advertising, such investigations can provide important answers to how U.S. advertisers can peddle their wares without fostering undesirable cultural consequences to individuals throughout the world.

Endnotes

' A more complete articulation of problems associated with sexist language is contained in Nilsen, Bosmajian, Gershuny & Stanley (1977, p 181-191).

^ NOW was consulted to determine whether ads crossed the boundary from "sexy" ads to "sexist" ads (Lipman 1991).

References

Artz, N. & Munger, J. L. (1996, October). Gender issues in the language used in television advertising. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Consumer Research, Tucson, Arizona.

Artz, N. & Munger, J. L. (1999, May). Gender issues in the language used in advertising. Paper presented at the Advertising and Consumer Psychology Conference on Diversity in Advertising, San Antonio, Texas.

Bellizzi, J. A., & Milner, L. (1991). Gender positioning of a traditionally male-dominant product. Journal of Advertising Research, 3/(3), 72- 79.

Bem, S. L. (1993). The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality. Hew Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Boroson, W. (1993, October 16). Editors who are feminincompoops. Editor & Publisher, 126 (42), 48, 39.

Boyd, D. R., Lewis, S. C , & Butler, G. L. (1988). Getting your message across. Management World 1988, 17, (4), 7(4).

Bretl, D. J., & Cantor, J. (1988). The portrayal of men and women in us television commercials: A recent content analysis and trends over 15 years. Sex Roles. 18 (9/10), 595-609.

Browne, B. A. (1998). Gender stereotypes in advertising on children's television in the 1990s: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Advertising, 27(I), Si-96.

Buttle, F. (1989). Sex-role stereotyping in advertising: Social and public policy issues. The Quarterly Review of Marketing, 14 (4), 9-14.

Canadian Govemment Publishing Centre (1982), Images of Women: Report of the Task Force on Sex-Role Stereotyping in the Broadcast Media, Ottawa, Ontario: Author.

The Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (1986). Report on Self-Regulation by the Broadcasting and Advertising Industries for the Elimination of Sex-Role Stereotyping in the Broadcast Media, Ottawa, Canada: Author.

Chelin, P. (1991). The inconsistencies in the Toronto Star and its 1990 style guide. Unpublished York University MS.

Cheng, H. (1997). Holding up half of the sky?' A Sociocultural Comparison of Gender-Role Portrayals in Chinese and U.U. Advertising, International Journal of Advertising, 16 (4), 295-319.

Cooper, R. L. (1984). The avoidance of androcentric generics. International Journal of the_Sociology of Language, 50 5-20.

Craig, R. S. (1992). The effect of television day part on gender portrayals in television commercials: A content analysis. Sex Roles 26(5/6): 197-211.

Courtney, A. E., & Whipple, T. W. (1974). Women in TV commercials. Journal of Communications, Spring 110-118.

Ehrlich, S. & King, R. (1992). Gender-based language reform and the social construction of meaning. Discourse and Society, 3 (2), 151- 166.

Fasold, R. W. (1988). Language Policy and Change: Sexist Language in the Periodical News Media, in Peter H. Lowenberg (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics: 1987 (pp. 187-206). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Ferguson, J. H., Kreshel, P. J., & Tinkham, S. F. (1990). b the pages of Ms.: Sex role portrayals of women in advertising. Journal of Advertising. 19(1), 40-51.

Ford, J. B., & LaTour, M. S. (1993). Differing reactions to female role portrayals in advertising. The Journal of Advertising Research, 33 (5), 43-52.

Ford, J. B., LaTour, M. S., & Lundstrom, W. J. (1991). Contemporary women's evaluation of female role portrayals in advertising. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 8(1), 15-28.

Ford, J. B., Vooli, P. K., Honneycutt, E. D., Jr., & Casey, S. L. (1998). Gender role portrayals in Japanese advertising: A magazine content analysis. Journal of Advertising, 27(1), 113-124.

Furnham, A., Abramsky, S., & Gunter, B. (1997). A cross-cultural content analysis of children's television advertisements. Sex Roles, 57(1-2), 91-99.

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2 Page 25

Fumham, A., & Bitar, N. (1993). The stereotyped portrayal of men and women in British television advertisements. Sex Rotes, 29 297-310.

Fumham, A., & Voli, V. (1989). Gender stereotypes in Italian television advertisements. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 33 (Spring), 175-185.

Garfield, B. (1999, February 1). Chauvinist pigskin: Ad review: Super Bowl advertisers set the world back 30 years with naked appeals to guys. Advertising Age, 1.

Garrett-Cline, C , & Masel-Walters, L. (1983). At least the editors are trying: Women and sexism in corporate publications. The ABCA Bulletin, 46 (3), 26-30.

Gastil, J. (1990). Generic pronouns and sexist language: The oxymoronic character of masculine generics. Sex Roles, 23, 629-643.

Geis, F. L , Brown. V., Walstedt, J. J., & Porter, N. (1984). TV commercials as achievement scripts for women. Sex Roles, 10 (April), 513-525.

Gilly. M. C. (1988). Sex roles in advertising: A comparison of television advertisements in Australia, Mexico, and the United States, Journal of Marketing, 52 (April), 75-85.

Griffm, M., Viswanath, K., & Schwartz, D. (1994). Gender advertising in the United States and India: Exporting cultural stereotypes. Media. Culture and Society, 16 487-507.

Hall, C , Iijima, C , & Crum, M. J. (1994). Women and "body-isms" in television beer commercials. Sex Roles, 31 (5-6). 329-337.

Harrigan, J. A., & Lucic, K. S. (1988). Attitudes about gender bias in language: A reevaluation. Sex Roles, 19 (3/4), 129-140.

Henley, N. (1989). Molehill or mountain? What we know and don't know about sex bias in language. In M. Crawford and M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and Thought: Psychological Perspectives (pp. 59-78) NY: Springer-Verlag.

Hicks, D. W., & Hull, R. P. (1991). Gender biased language in accounting and business joumals. The Woman CFA. 53 (3), 4-7.

Hyde, J. S. (1984) Children's understanding of sexist language. Developmental Psychology, 20 697-706.

Jennings-Walstedt, J., Geis, F. L., & Brown, V. (1980). Influence of television commercials on women's self-confidence and independent judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38 (Febrtiary), 203-210.

Jones, M. Y., Stanaland, A. J.S., & Gelb, B. D. (1998). Beefcake and cheesecake: Insights for advertisers. Journal of Advertising, 27 (2), 33-51.

Kilboume, J. (Producer & Moderator). (1987). Still Killing Us Softly: Advertising Images of Women [Film], Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Documentary Films.

Kuiper, S. (1988). Gender representation in corporate annual reports and perceptions of corporate climate. The Journal of Business Communications, 25 (3), 87-94.

Lazier-Smith, L. (1989). Advertising: Women's place and image, in Pamela J. Creedon (Ed.) Women in Mass Communication: Challenging Gender Values (pp. 247-260). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Upman, J. (1991, September 30). Sexy or sexist? Recent ads spark debate. Wall Street Journal, BI, B4.

Livingstone, S., & Green, G. (1986). Television advertisements and the portrayal of gender. British Journal of Social Psychology. 25 (June), 149-154.

Lysonski, S. (1985). Role portrayals in British magazine advertisements, European Journal of Marketing, 19 (7), 37-55.

MacKenzie, S. B., Lutz, R. J., & Belch, G. E. (1986). The role of attitude toward the ad as a mediator of advertising effectiveness: A test of competing explanations. Journal of Marketing Research, 23 (May), 130-143.

Martyna, W. (1978). What does 'he' mean? Journal of Communication, 28 (1), 131-138.

Mazzella, C , Durkin, K., Cerini, E., & Buralli, P. (1992). Sex role stereotyping in Australian television advertisements. Sex Roles, 26 (7/8), 243-259.

McConnell, A. R., & Fazio, R. H. (1996). Women as men and people: Effects of gender-marked language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 1004-1013.

McMinn, M. R., Lindsay, S. F., Hannum, L E., & Troyer, P. K. (1990). Does sexist language reflect personal characteristics? Sex Role.'!, 23 (7/8), 389-396.

Merritt, R. D., & Kok, C. J. (1995). Attribution of gender to a gender- unspecified individual: An evaluation of the people = male hypothesis. Sex Roles, 33 145-157.

Miller, A. T., Carpenter. W., Claggett, W. M., Heckel, F. W., & Nelson, J. C. (1975). Advertising and Women. New York: National Advertising Review Board.

Miller, C. (1988). The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.

Moschis, G. P., & Moore, R. L. (1982). A longitudinal study of television advertising effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (December), 270-289.

Murdock, N. L , & Donelson, F. R. (1985). Is gender-biased language sexist? A perceptual approach. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9 (March), 39-49.

Mwangi, M. W. (1996). Gender roles portrayed in Kenyan television commercials. Sex Rotes, 34 (3-4), 205-214.

Newman, M. (1992). Pronominal disagreements: The stubbom problem of singular epicene antecedents. Language in Society, 21 (3), 447- 475.

Newsom, D. (1988). How women are depicted in annual reports, Pubtic Relations Review, 74.(3), 15-19.

Nilsen, A. P., Bosmajian, H., Gershuny, H. L., & Stanley, J. P. (1977). Sexism and Language (Stock No. 19719). Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Perreauit, W. D. Jr. and L. E. Leigh (1989). "Reliability of Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments," Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 135-148.

Pitt, M. J., (1994). A practical guide to gender neutral language. Management Decision, 32 (6), 41-44.

Prentice, D. (1994). Do language reforms change our way of thinking? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13 (1), 3-19.

Rubin, D. L., & Greene, K. L. (1991). Effects of biological and psychological gender, age cohort, and interviewer gender on attitudes toward gender-inclusive/exclusive language. Sex Roles, 24 (7/8), 391-412.

Rubin, D. L., Greene, K. & Schneider, D. (1994). Adopting gender- inclusive language reforms: Diachronic and synchronic variation, Joumalofthe Language and Sociat Psychology, 13 (2), 91-114.

Schwartz, M. (1995). Guidelines for Bias-Free Writing, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Sengupta, S. (1995). The influence of culture on portrayals of women in television commercials: A comparison between the United States and Japan. Intemational Journal of Advertising J 4 314-333.

Wattman, H., Treicher, F. & Treichler, P. A. (Eds.). (1989). Language, Gender, and Professional Writing: Theoretical Approaches and Guidelines for Nonsexist Usage, Vol. VIII, New York: Commission on Status of Women in the Profession, Modem Language Association of America.

Wyckham, R. G. (1987). Self-regulation of sex-role stereotyping in advertising: The Canadian experience. Journal of Pubtic Policy and Marketing, 6 (I), 16-92.

Wyckham, R. G. (1993). Self-regulation of sex-role stereotyping: educating the advertising industry. Journal of Consumer Policy. 16 (2) June, 235-253.

Nancy Artz is an Associate Professor of Marketing, Jeanne Munger is an Assistant Professor of Marketing. Warren Purdy is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Southem Maine in Portland, Maine. The authors gratefully acknowledge a research grant from the LSM/New England Group and assistance from Sarah Beard, Michael Coyne, and Mark Primeau. All correspondence regarding this manuscript should be directed to Jeanne Munger (phone: 207/780-4925, email: [email protected]).

Women and Language, Volume XXII, No. 2, Page 26