Edited by: Ludovic Ferrand, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), France
Reviewed by: Ana Rita Sá-Leite, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Elena Dubenko, University of Basel, Switzerland
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
In many languages with grammatical gender, the use of masculine forms as a generic reference has been associated with a bias favoring masculine-specific representations. This article examines the efficiency of gender-fair forms, specifically gender-unmarked forms (neutralization strategy, e.g., “l'enfant”) and contracted double forms (re-feminization strategy, e.g., “un·e enfant”), in reducing gender biases in language. Extensive empirical research has shown that gender-fair forms have the potential to promote more gender-balanced representations. However, the relative efficiency of these strategies remains a subject of debate in the scientific literature. In order to explore these questions, two experiments were conducted in French. We analyzed the response times and percent correct scores using a sentence evaluation paradigm, where the participants had to decide whether a second sentence starting with a gendered personal pronoun (“il” or “elle”) was a sensible continuation of the first sentence written in a gender-fair form. Experiment 1 confirmed that gender-unmarked forms are not fully effective in neutralizing the masculine bias. In Experiment 2, a comparison was made between gender-unmarked forms and contracted double forms, to assess their respective abilities to generate more balanced representations. The findings indicated that contracted double forms are more effective in promoting gender balance compared to gender-unmarked forms. This study contributes to the existing scientific literature by shedding light on the relative efficiency of neutralization and re-feminization strategies in reducing gender biases in language. These results have implications for informing efforts to promote more inclusive and unbiased language practices.
香京julia种子在线播放
In languages with grammatical gender, such as French, the use of masculine forms to refer to both males and females, as well as unspecified or mixed-gender groups, is a common linguistic convention (Gygax et al.,
[I have thirty-four students
The resolution of this kind of ambiguity relies on various cognitive mechanisms, including world knowledge, context, and pragmatic cues. However, previous research suggests that the ambiguity is typically resolved to the disadvantage of the feminine gender, with the masculine generic favoring the activation of masculine-specific representations. For instance, in Experiment 1 of Gygax and Gabriel (
One effective approach to reduce the influence of the masculine bias caused by masculine-generic forms is to employ gender-fair forms. Two main strategies can be distinguished regarding gender-fair language (see, e.g., Tibblin et al.,
Average reaction times
There are two important distinctions between the gender-unmarked form and the contracted double form. First, while the gender-unmarked form is truly neutral in the sense that it lacks any explicit gender markings, the contracted double form explicitly includes both the feminine and the masculine forms. Secondly, these two forms hold different sociolinguistic status. Gender-unmarked forms are relatively common in standard French, even in a generic masculine context, whereas contracted double forms are still socially marked: although their use has been promoted in France since 2015 by the
Extensive empirical research has been conducted to investigate whether the masculine bias associated with masculine generic forms can be eliminated or reduced through the use of gender-fair forms. Brauer and Landry (
Studies investigating the efficiency of the neutralization strategy in reducing masculine bias are more seldom. Kim et al. (
This raises the question of whether one of the two strategies (neutralization or re-feminization) is more effective in promoting gender-balanced representations. Only a few studies have been designed to address this question, and the conclusions drawn from them are generally inconsistent. Lindqvist et al. (
In summary, both gender-unmarked forms (neutralization strategy) and contracted double forms (re-feminization strategy) have potential in reducing gender biases in language. However, gender-unmarked forms seem to yield intermediate results between double forms and masculine generic forms, suggesting a more nuanced impact on mental representations. Thus, the objective of the present study was twofold: firstly, to provide confirmation, using French sentences, that gender-unmarked forms are not fully effective in neutralizing the inherent masculine bias (Experiment 1); second, to compare this condition with a re-feminization strategy, specifically the contracted double form using a mid-dot (Experiment 2). Our hypothesis for the second experiment was that contracted double forms would yield more balanced representations than gender-unmarked forms.
As noted above, the choice of a particular methodology is crucial for detecting potential differences among gender-fair forms. To ensure precise measurements capable of capturing these distinctions, we modified the sentence evaluation paradigm employed in prior studies (Gygax et al.,
The pre-test consisted in judging the extent to which a role noun was more represented by men or women. A list of 46 gender-unmarked words beginning with a vowel was tested (see
We wanted our stimuli to be as unstereotyped as possible. Thus, we first selected the 25 words that came closest to 50% masculine. We further excluded two words (é
Forty-seven psychology students (44 women, 3 men) at Grenoble-Alpes University, participated in this study for course credit. They were all French native speakers and had either normal or corrected vision.
Each of the 22 gender-unmarked, non-stereotyped words that were selected by the means of the pretest (e.g., é
Participants were seated ~50 cm from a computer screen. They were informed that they would read a succession of sentences, in pairs, and that they would have to determine as quickly as possible whether the second sentence was a good or bad continuation of the first one. The experiment was run on E-Prime 2.0 software (Psychology Software Tools, Pittsburgh, PA). The first sentence (context sentence) remained on the screen for 3 s. It was then replaced by the second one (continuation sentence). The participant then had to respond as quickly as possible by using one of the two keys on the keyboard. They were asked to press the “yes” key with their preferred hand. The intertrial interval was 3 s. The experiment began by 10 practice trials followed by a list of 88 (66 fillers and 22 experimental) trials that were randomly presented.
For the 22 experimental trials, half of the continuation sentences began with
Data were analyzed through Bayesian hierarchical mixed effects regression models. This choice was motivated by the need to examine the influence of the predictor variable,
Firstly, reaction times for all positive responses were examined.
where
with
Secondly, participants' responses (yes/no) per item were analyzed using a logistic regression model with the same design as for the response time data. The probability of correct response was assumed to follow the general form for the psychometric function, with a chance level at 0.5:
where
For simplicity,
All analyses were carried with R version 4.3.0 (R Core Team,
The results from Experiment 1, averaged by participant, grammatical form and grammatical gender, are shown in
Posterior distributions for all fixed-effect parameters in the reaction-time models
The average reaction times in the gender-neutral form condition was 1,594 ms ± 400 ms SD for continuation sentences beginning with a feminine pronoun and 1,468 ms ± 333 ms SD for continuation sentences beginning with a masculine pronoun. The posterior distribution for the parameter β
It is important to note that reaction times varied noticeably across different items. For instance, the continuation sentence following
Participants achieved scores ranging from 55 to 100% for feminine continuation sentences (mean = 84%), and from 64 to 100% for masculine continuation sentences (mean = 91%). This difference was associated with a strong β
Similar to response times, a strong variability was found in the mean performance achieved on each specific item. A separate multivariate Gaussian distribution fitted on the vectors of random intercepts from the two models identified that the two variables were likely negatively correlated [
Experiment 1 aimed to investigate the effects of grammatical gender on response times and accuracy in sentence processing, specifically in a context where the words were previously referred to with gender-unmarked forms. The context sentence did not provide any grammatical-gender cue, and the words were selected to be stereotype-neutral (e.g.,
The two statistical models supported our hypothesis, revealing a clear effect of the grammatical gender of the pronoun in the continuation sentence on both response times and accuracy scores. Specifically, sentences beginning with
One critical question remains regarding the generality of this result. Does the observed masculine bias extend to all gender-fair forms, or is it specific to gender-neutral form? Our hypothesis was that the use of a re-feminization strategy could potentially eliminate the masculine bias. The rationale behind this hypothesis stems from the notion that re-feminized forms explicitly reintroduce grammatical gender markers associated with the feminine gender. Therefore, if the masculine bias is primarily driven by the absence of grammatical gender cues in gender-neutral forms, the re-feminized forms should counteract this bias.
In order to test this hypothesis, we designed a second experiment comparing the processing of gender-unmarked forms with contracted double forms. We expected that, in the second case, the observed masculine bias would be totally eliminated, or at least drastically reduced.
Seventy psychology students (64 women, 6 men) at Grenoble-Alpes University participated in this study for course credit. All subjects were native French speakers, with normal or corrected vision. Thirty-four participants were assigned to the gender-unmarked condition and 36 to the contracted double form condition.
The gender-unmarked condition was a replication of experiment 1. Hence, the stimuli in this condition were the same as those of experiment 1, that is: context sentences began with
Participants were randomly assigned to either the gender-unmarked or the contracted double form condition. Apart from that, the procedure followed that of experiment 1.
The structure of the models in experiment 2 replicated that employed in experiment 1, with the only difference that the models also include the effect of factor
The results from Experiment 2, averaged by participant, grammatical form and grammatical gender in each of the two conditions, are shown in
In the gender-unmarked condition, continuation sentences beginning with a feminine pronoun yielded a mean reaction time of 1,575 ms ± 505 SD and an average accuracy score of 84.2%. Conversely, continuation sentences beginning with a masculine pronoun had a mean reaction time of 1,394 ms ± 370 SD and an average score of 92.2%. These findings closely aligned with the results observed in Experiment 1. In particular, the posterior distributions for β0 and β
In contrast, for the contracted double form condition, the measured reaction times were similar between feminine (mean = 1,467 ms ± 366 SD) and masculine continuation sentences (mean = 1,446 ms ± 395 SD). As a result, the posterior distribution for the β
Similar to Experiment 1, we measured the correlation between item-specific random intercepts from the reaction-time model and from the percent-correct model. No reliable correlation was found [
The objective of the present study was to examine the efficiency of gender-unmarked forms and contracted double forms in mitigating gender biases in language. Two experiments were conducted, in which participants had to judge the consistency of a pair of French sentences: a context sentence where the gender of the character was intentionally left unspecified, using gender-fair forms, and a continuation sentence beginning with a feminine or a masculine singular pronoun. All nouns included in the experiment were pre-tested for the absence of strong gender stereotypes. In the first experiment, we confirmed that gender-unmarked forms in French were not fully successful in neutralizing the masculine bias. Specifically, sentences beginning with a feminine pronoun exhibited longer processing times and higher error rates compared to those beginning with a masculine pronoun, indicating the persistence of a masculine bias even in a gender-neutral context. For instance, following the context sentence
The results of Experiment 1 are consistent with our hypothesis: gender-unmarked forms in French are not fully effective in neutralizing masculine bias. This finding is in line with previous research demonstrating that neutral wordings elicit a male bias, in English and Swedish (Lindqvist et al.,
The observation of a masculine bias in the absence of any grammatical marker may seem surprising. At this point we can only speculate about the causes of this effect. Two possible, non-exclusive explanations are considered in the following paragraphs: a first one based on lexical frequency effects, and another one based on semantics.
An interesting explanation for the observed masculine bias is based on the fact that singular gender-neutral words, despite having no fixed grammatical gender, are often used as generic masculine forms. This is the case, for example, in sentences such as
Because of the prevalence of these singular generic masculine constructions, gender-neutral words are more frequently seen in their masculine forms. Therefore, when presented with a gender-neutral form such as
A similar effect can be conceived at a semantic level. As noted by Richy and Burnett (
Here, the generic nouns “people” and “citizen” are used to specifically refer to heterosexual men, thereby excluding women. Such usage suggests that English speakers tend to associate strong masculine representations with gender-neutral expressions. In French, Michard (
These examples highlight that the use of gender-neutral nouns does not necessarily imply inclusive reference. Instead, due to our androcentric experiences and cultural influences, gender-neutral nouns may carry underlying masculine stereotypes. This could in turn explain why, in the present study, the items resulted in more activation of the masculine representations.
In order to disentangle the locus (lexico-statistics vs. semantic level) of the masculine bias in the absence of gender marking, we plan to run a series of experiments using stimuli than convey conflicting cues between frequency of usage and semantics. In French some generic nouns occur only in the feminine form (e.g.,
Another promising direction for broadening the scope of the study would involve testing the presence of masculine bias using unbalanced stereotyped words, in order to examine how the observed effects interact with stereotypes. This line of investigation would serve two complementary purposes. First, it would enable us to validate the robustness of the effects measured in our controlled experimental conditions, when tested in more ecological situations. Second, this would facilitate the manipulation of the semantics toward feminine representations. This is particularly relevant considering that frequency of usage may favors masculine representations due to the masculine generic rule (see section 4.2). Should we observe a persistent masculine bias in sentences such as
Finally, previous research has highlighted the influence of participant's gender and self-reported masculinity levels on gender processing effects (Casado et al.,
All the codes and data supporting this study are openly available on Github at
The studies involving humans were approved by Comité d'Ethique de la Recherche Paris-Descartes. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
ES: Writing—review and editing, Data curation, Methodology, Resources. J-PC: Methodology, Writing—review and editing, Conceptualization. LV: Writing— review and editing, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing—original draft.
The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was funded by the ANR grants DRhyaDS (No. ANR-22-FRAL-0003) and FrontCog (Grant No. ANR-17-EURE-0017).
The authors would like to thank Jules Guttierez, Lola Purghe and Aida El Karafli for their help during data collection. We are also grateful to Sharon Peperkamp for her insightful comments during the writing process.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at:
1The use of this sentence has been reported by Hofstadter and Sander (
2We refrain from using the term “epicene words” (Tibblin et al.,
3Again, there is some disagreement on the terminology, as some authors use the term “gender-neutral” (Brauer and Landry,
4A confirmatory analysis excluding reaction time data larger/smaller than the mean ± 2 SD for each participant yielded essentially the same results.
5When it comes to inclusive writing, there are several options in French. In our day-to-day reading, we may encounter hyphens (un-e), parentheses (un(e)) or the mid-dot (un·e), as there are no official characters so far. In this experiment, we chose to use the mid-dot. The mid-dot has the advantage of having no other function in the French language, unlike hyphens or parentheses, which are used to link terms together or to add precision to a written text.