# The Influence of Gender Language on Thought and Memory
Written on
Chapter 1: Understanding Gender Perspectives
To grasp what drives people's views, simply ask them: What do you think about gender? Almost everyone has a stance, typically divided into two opposing factions: one that vehemently opposes gender considerations and another that advocates for them. For instance, Christoph Ploß, the CDU leader in Hamburg, recently called for prohibiting gendered language in government communications. He reflects a broader sentiment, as surveys indicate that 50 to 65 percent of Germans share similar views.
Conversely, proponents of gender-inclusive language argue for terms like "listeners" instead of "listeners" and "students" instead of "students." This shift aims to promote less gender-specific thinking. By using "manager" instead of "manager," it conveys the notion that managerial roles can include women, not just men.
Is this merely a feminist fantasy? Far from it. Numerous laboratory studies demonstrate that the use of the generic masculine form—such as "teacher" or "policeman"—affects cognitive processing. Simply put, when people refer to "managers," they might inherently exclude women from that perception. This lack of explicit mention can reinforce the stereotype that management roles are male-dominated.
The implications of this phenomenon are backed by extensive research, and a new study adds further weight to these findings. It reveals that gender influences not only our mental connections but also our memory.
Section 1.1: The Study by April Bailey
A recent study conducted by American psychologist April Bailey at Yale University highlights this issue. Yale's unique structure randomly assigns students to one of 14 residential colleges, each led by a faculty member. Prior to 2016, the title for these leaders was "Master," which has traditionally male connotations. The university later changed this title to "Head," a gender-neutral alternative.
Bailey sought to discover whether this change impacted students' perceptions and memory. She surveyed nearly 340 participants at two different times: once in 2015, before the title change, and again in 2018, after the change.
Subsection 1.1.1: Key Findings
Bailey uncovered two significant findings. Initially, when the leaders were still referred to as "masters," students predominantly associated leadership roles with men. However, three years later, after the title was changed to "head," women were more frequently connected with these positions.
Moreover, Bailey administered a memory test during both surveys. Participants viewed various photos of male and female leaders and were asked to identify who managed the residential colleges. In the first survey, participants recognized significantly more male leaders than female leaders. By the second survey, this discrepancy had vanished.
One plausible explanation is that individuals tend to better recognize faces that align with their expectations. Thus, by 2018, participants were more accustomed to the idea that women could hold management roles, making it easier for them to identify female leaders.
Section 1.2: Implications of the Findings
What can we learn from Bailey's study? Like all research, it's essential to approach these findings cautiously. Bailey emphasizes that gendered language not only shapes associative thinking but also affects how memorable certain information is.
Interestingly, the motivation behind Yale's change from "Master" to "Head" was not primarily to promote gender equality, but rather due to concerns over the historical implications of the term "Master," which is associated with ownership and slavery. Bailey suggests that perhaps the successful reception of this change stemmed from its non-feminist origins.
This context may also shed light on why many men vehemently oppose gender-neutral language—not out of concern for language, but due to feelings of threat posed by women.
Chapter 2: Exploring Gender Roles in Society
The first video titled "Should We Bring Back Traditional Gender Roles? | Man on the Street" dives into contemporary debates surrounding gender roles, highlighting various public opinions and attitudes.
The second video, "Gender Pay Gap- Econ in Real Life," examines the economic implications of gender differences in the workplace, offering insights into the ongoing discussion about equity and representation.