English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aims of the present study are to identify the role that family socialisation styles play in ambivalent sexism and whether differences in sexism can be attributed to gender. We used a sample of 207 adolescents (56.5% girls), all of whom attended state schools and were aged between 14 and 18 years old, with an average age of 16.2 (SD = 1.7). The instruments used were the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) consisting of two factors – hostile sexism and benevolent sexism – and the Family Socialization Scale (SOC-30) made up of four subscales: support, punishment/coercion, overprotection/control, and reprobation. The results show that boys presented higher levels of ambivalent sexism than girls and the reprobation of adolescents was the family socialization type that had the strongest associations with ambivalent sexism scales in both genders. The data suggest that family socialisation dynamics play an important role in the acquisition and retention of sexist attitudes.

Ambivalent sexism in adolescence: The relationship between family socialization styles and ambivalent sexism in adolescence