Predicting Objectification: Do Provocative Clothing and Observer Characteristics Matter?

By R. Gurung, Carly J. Chrouser. 2007

145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Marketing, Museology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c7fb598411c1e1e3d0ac55d3f9a42b6d442ccd69

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Marketing

In Museology

Citations in the corpus

“Putting on” Sexiness: A Content Analysis of the Presence of Sexualizing Characteristics in Girls’ Clothing (2011, background): “provocative clothing have been rated by observers as more flirtatious, seductive, promiscuous, and sexually experienced—and as less strong, determined, intelligent, and selfrespecting (Gurung and Chrouser 2007; Koukounas and Letch 2001).”
Oppressive Beliefs at Play: Associations among Beauty Ideals and Practices and Individual Differences in Sexism, Objectification of Others, and Media Exposure (2010, methodology): “…oppression more generally (Frederickson & Roberts, 1997) and, as such, we use the term “other-objectification” to refer to the general trait of objectifying others—rather than to a single act of objectification or the act of self-objectification (following Gurung & Chrouser, 2007, pp. 91–92).”
Too Sexualized to be Taken Seriously? Perceptions of a Girl in Childlike vs. Sexualizing Clothing (2012, background): “Gurung and Chrouser (2007) studied the perceptions of accomplished women athletes who were pictured in sexually objectified ways in men’s magazines.”
Sexy versus Strong: What Girls and Women Think of Female Athletes. (2012, background): “…studies on viewers’ perceptions of athletes portrayed as attractive or sexually provocative in media demonstrate that these athletes are considered less capable and talented than athletes represented in a manner that focuses on their athleticism (Gurung & Chrouser, 2007; Knight & Giuliano, 2001).”
Low-Cut Shirts and High-Heeled Shoes: Increased Sexualization Across Time in Magazine Depictions of Girls (2013, background): “In addition, as with women (Daniels and Wartena 2011; Glick et al. 2005; Gurung and Chrouser 2007), the sexualization of girls can affect how others perceive and evaluate them.”
Women's Intentions Regarding, and Acceptance of, Self-Sexualizing Behavior (2009, background): “Gurung and Chrouser (2007) found that women objectify other women when targets were shown in provocatively dressed outfits, but not in nonprovocative attire.”
Seeing women as objects: The sexual body part recognition bias (2012, background): “…many have examined appearance-focused objectification (e.g., Heflick & Goldenberg, 2009; Heflick et al., 2010), for example, regarding physical appearance attributes as more important than other person attributes (e.g., physical fitness, Strelan & Hargreaves, 2005; Gurung & Chrouser, 2007).”
Female Self-Sexualization in MySpace.com Personal Profile Photographs (2012, background): “The question remains why a woman would choose to present herself in a sexualized manner? Both Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and Cultivation Theory (CT) offer one explanation for this phenomenon and help to establish the media’s role as a sexual socialization agent ( Gurung and Chrouser 2007 ).”