An Observation into the representation of males and female in British advertisements.

Practical 4

An Observation into the representation of males and female in British advertisements

Abstract

An observational study was conducted to test the hypothesis that there is a marked difference in the way men and women are portrayed in British advertisements. A total number of 52 advertisements were recorded and observed for the following categories: sex of central character; sex of background character; type of argument given by central character; credibility of central character; role; product type and location. There were only slight differences in the way men and women were portrayed. The observations were compared using the chi-square test, however the differences were not significant.CONC

Introduction

The media plays a vital role in our society, especially in developing people’s opinion and their attitudes. It has an intensifying effect on its viewers, which in most cases is children and sets the trend as to how everyday life should really be. Advertisements are also a powerful source of information. One can see that the advertising world “labels” many people. Advertisements emphasise the point that if you buy a particular product charm, comfort and cheerfulness will be yours, whereas this is highly unlikely! The media not only develops people’s opinions but advertisements also portray images, which reflect society’s attitudes.

Murray et al (1972) note that television is an important agent of socialisation, hence television advertisements are likely to play an active role in shaping cultural values (Manstead & McCulloch 1981). Advertisements publicise products, therefore the best way to do this is to produce advertisements, which reflect society, and it’s values (Millum 1975).

Thus, the present study centres on sex role stereotyping in British Television advertisements. The analysis of television advertisements should support Millum’s notion that advertisements represent the cultural values of society. In general, ‘sex stereotypes’ s indicate a “ structured set of beliefs about the personal attributes of women and men” (Ashmore & Del Bora 1972, p.222). It is these stereotypes which have distressing effects on individuals. For e.g. women in advertisements play the roles which the product demands. They are seen as slim, attractive, successful and happy with men. In society, girls and women worry about not accomplishing and achieving these roles. This can lead to and result in depression and lack of self-confidence. This may also explain why today, many women are concerned with dieting and slimming and why anorexia and bulimia affects a large Number of teenagers.

Bandura argued that our environment influences behaviour. He believes that modelling, that is observational learning is very important. Bandura maintained that observation is vital in learning. He emphasises that through observing behaviour and the consequences of particular behaviour, humans learn how to interact. He conducted a number of experiments to test whether children who watch powerful or attractive models behaving in certain ways are more likely to behave in similar ways themselves.

Bandura (1985) also put forward the notion of vicarious reinforcement, which states that the imitation of behaviour depends on whether the model’s behaviour is rewarded or punished. In addition, Bandura stipulated that human behaviour is self-regulated. Individuals develop behaviour standards or moral codes through observation. Through self-regulation, the individual will analyse their behaviour against these standards. If their behaviour fails to reach the standard, it is evaluated negatively. Yet if their behaviour complies with the standards it is evaluated positively.

Durkin (1985) also emphasised the importance of role models. He argued that television models are particularly salient to children ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Durkin (1985) also emphasised the importance of role models. He argued that television models are particularly salient to children for sex role socialisation. Durkin (1984) conducted a study where young children watched a selection of television material, which showed male and female stereotypes. Durkin interviewed the children about the material and concluded that children are able to develop “ scripts of sex roles, which are often consonant with the stereotypes perpetuated in television.” Nevertheless, Durkin emphasises that extensive research is required in order to investigate this connection. Durkin (1985) has also analysed British television advertisements. Durkin (1985) found that men and women were portrayed very differently. In general, women were not shown as frequently as men were. Moreover, they were less likely to have leading roles.

It has also been found that usually women are shown as a mere “addition” to men or portrayed as subordinate to men (Hennessee & Nicholson, 1972; Manstead & McCulloch, 1981). Hennessee & Nicholson (1972) also note that women are shown in a dim manner and portrayed as sex objects. A number of studies have found that men are more likely to be used for ‘voice-overs’. One reason for this may be because the ‘voice-over’ provides authoritative information which is an essential feature of advertisements (Dominick &Rauch, 1972; Pyke &Stewart, 1974; Culley & Bennett 1976; Maracek ET al, 1978; Knill ET al, 1981; Manstead & McCulloch, 1981).

Manstead & McCulloch (1981) wanted to investigate sex roles in British society, today; hence they analysed a sample of British advertisements. They found that men and women were shown in remarkably different ways. Manstead & McCulloch (1981) stipulated that this suggests that these differences found in the portrayal of men and women correspond with the traditional sex role stereotypes. Their study was an extension of McArthur & Resko’s (1975) analysis into the content of American television advertisements.

McArthur & Resko (1975) noted that in american advertisements only 14% of women were “experts”, in contrast with 70% of men who were shown as “experts”. Moreover, of the central figures who appeared in occupational settings, only 11% were women (McArthur & Resko, 1975). They compared this to the American labour force where women comprised 37% of the labour force (1969).

Harris and Stobart (1986) conducted a study which was an extension of Manstead & McCulloch’s (1981). They made small changes to the categories, and also added two new categories to the original data sheet used by Manstead and McCulloch (1981). Once again, Harris and Stobart (1986) found that there are many deviations in the way men and women are portrayed. Moreover, these differences are consistent with the traditional sex role stereotypes. In addition, they noted that this phenomenon is much more evident in the evening when compared to the daytime. Harris and Stobart (1985) concluded that this phenomenon is unusually complex, in that the way men and women are shown change during the course of the day.

Peter Golding has conducted more recent research into the general election of 2001 at Loughborough University; he reported his study in The Guardian (2001). Golding et al concluded that during the first three weeks of campaigning, women were rarely shown. Their data summary is as follows:

91% of politicians were male- 9% female
17% of politicians relatives shown were male- 87% female
50.5% of celebrities shown were male –49.5% female
92% of city/business people shown were male- 8% male
81% of the other professionals shown were male –44% female

One can argue that society still constrains women to adapt to certain roles. A role of the housewife or the mother whose only priority is to ensure the house is clean and the meal is at the table. The media creates a deceptive appearance of equality, yet it still continues to support women’s traditional role at home. Consequently, the aim of the present study is to replicate previous studies like Manstead & McCulloch (1981) and examine the portrayal of males and females in British television advertisements.

Hypothesis

There is a marked difference in the way men and women are portrayed in British advertisements.

Method

Apparatus and materials

The advertisements were recorded from the television to a video recorder. They were then observed, the analysis was recorded onto a tally sheet. A copy of the tally sheet has been reproduced in Appendix 1.

Researchers

There were five observers who watched a total of 52 advertisements, over a period of one week. The advertisements were recorded from two main channels- ITV and Channel 5.

Procedure

The observations took place over a one-week period. A total of 52 advertisements were observed over 5 different channels. There were seven categories, which were coded accordingly:

Sex of central character(s): female(F) male (M) both (B)
Sex of background characters: female (F) male (M) both (B)
Type of argument given by central character(s) in favour of product:

Factual (F) here the central character is providing the audience with a fact -based argument or with evidence.
Opinion (OP) here the central character provides argument based on personal feelings or personal experience
Other (O)- both or neither

Credibility of central character(s) in favour of product:

User (U)- primarily a user of the product.
Authority (A)- primarily a source of verbal information about the product.
Other (O)

Role:

Dependent (D) – the central figure is in a reliant role
Autonomous (A) – the central character is shown in a professional role or as an authority figure or someone in charge.

6. Product type:

Household (H)
Cosmetics (C)
Food/drink, (F)
Car or related, (CAR)
Other e.g. insurance, holidays (O)

7. Location:

Home (H)
Work(W)
Other (O)

Results

The chi-square test was used to compare the observed data for the type of argument, role & gender and credibility. Details of the calculations can be found in Appendix 2.

Type of argument: 29% of the advertisements had females giving a factual argument, compared to 15% of males. However, the data analysis did not show any significance. (X2= 0.029, d.f. =1, P > 0.05). The number of males and females giving a factual argument is displayed below:

Fig. 1.

Credibility: 15% of the advertisements had females as the central character as authority, whereas 17% of the advertisements had a male central character as authority. Once again, the data analysis showed no significance. (X2 = 2.37, d.f. = 1, P > 0.05)

Role and Gender: 23% of the advertisements had a female central character in a dependent role and 12% in an autonomous role. In contrast 4% of advertisements had a male as central character in a dependent role and 17% in autonomous role. The chi square test showed no significance for this. (X2 = 2.34, d.f. = 1, P> 0.05). The number of males and females with an autonomous role (fig. 2) and dependent role (fig. 3) is displayed below:

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3

Discussion

The hypothesis, that there is a marked difference in the way men and women are portrayed in British advertisements was not supported. This study fails to replicate the findings of psychologists like Manstead and McCulloch (1981) and Durkin (1985a). There are many differences in the findings of these studies and the present study.

Manstead and McCulloch (1981) found that 66% of the advertisements were with a male as the central character, by comparison with the present study, 37%. It was also found that females were the central characters in 56% of the advertisements. However it must be noted that the timings of the both studies are very different, this may have played an important part in the observation of the advertisements. This is because Harris & Stobart (1986) stated that the visual modality of males and females change over the course of the day. They reported that females were dominant through the daytime and male pre-dominated the evening advertisements.

Although the findings were not significant, there was one finding which was similar to that of Manstead & McCulloch (1981) and McArthur & Resko (1975). Both these previous studies found that there was a tendency for females to be portrayed in dependent roles and males shown in autonomous role; also females were shown at home more often than males and males were more likely to be shown at work than females. The present study summarised the observations as percentages. It was found that 23% of females were portrayed in dependent roles compared to 4% of males. In addition, 27% of females were shown at home compared to 6% of males being shown at home. Moreover, it was found that 2% of females were shown at work whereas 10% of males were shown at work.

There may be a number of reasons for these differences. There were many groups of observers, however the groups were not set any guidelines as to when the observations should be made. That is, there was no observer inter-rater reliability. Harris and Stobart (1986) found that the portrayal of men and women changes during the course of the day. Moreover, these differences are much more evident in the evening than the day. Thus, one group may have conducted the observations during the afternoon and another group may have conducted this during the evening, which may have lead to differences.

To overcome, this problem, one could set a pilot study where the same criteria for observation could be fixed for all observers.

Moreover, there was a limited selection of advertisements. This selection was restricted to two channels. This can be compared to Manstead and McCulloch’s (1981) study, where they observed one hundred and seventy advertisements.

The time of year can also make a significant difference, as there are different adverts for different times. The present study was conducted in the “January sale season.” A period where there are likely to be more shopping orientated advertisements, targeted for women with women as characters. In the present study, 56% of the advertisements were with a female as the only central character.

Further experiments could be done to see whether advertisements change in different countries. Do these sex-role stereotypes exist in advertisements all over the world? In addition, one could conduct an experiment where participants are shown a program of gender stereotyping. They could then be shown a series of advertisements to see whether they point out any issues, which they have already seen in the gender stereotyping program.

References

Durkin. K (1985a) Television and sex role acquisition. 1. Content. British Journal of Social Psychology 24 101-113

Durkin. K. (1985b) Television and sex role acquisition. 2. Effects. British Journal of social Psychology 24 191-209

Eysenck, M (1998). Psychology an Integrated Approach, 437-452

Golding. P. (2001) The Guardian 28.05.01 Page 7

Harris and Stobart (1986) Sex-Role stereotyping in British Television advertisements at different times of the day: An extension and refinement of Manstead and McCulloch (1981) British Journal Of Social Psychology 25 155-164

Kohlberg. L. (1966) in Durkin. K (1985a) Television and sex role acquisition. 1. Content. British Journal of Social Psychology 24 101-113

Manstead and McCulloch (1981) Sex-Role stereotyping in British television advertisements. British Journal of Social Psychology 20 171-180

Mischel.W. (1976) in Durkin. K (1985a) Television and sex role acquisition. 1. Content. British Journal of Social Psychology 24 101-113

An Observation into the representation of males and female in British advertisements.