全面性教育课程改善大学生敌意和善意性别偏见的效果评估

芦鸣祺; 郭凌风; 刘文利

doi:10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024080

全面性教育课程改善大学生敌意和善意性别偏见的效果评估

doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024080

芦鸣祺¹,
郭凌风¹,
刘文利^{1, 2, ,}

1.
北京师范大学中国基础教育质量监测协同创新中心，北京 100875
2.
北京师范大学心理学部认知神经科学与学习国家重点实验室

基金项目:

联合国教科文组织项目 324028040

联合国人口基金和联合国教科文组织项目 UNFPA/CHN/2019/04

详细信息

作者简介:
芦鸣祺(1994-)，女，甘肃省人，在读博士，主要研究方向为教育评价、健康教育与促进

通讯作者:
刘文利，E-mail：liuwenli@bnu.edu.cn

利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。
中图分类号: R179 R167 B844.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 64
- HTML全文浏览量: 34
- PDF下载量: 21
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-10-19
- 修回日期: 2023-11-25
- 网络出版日期: 2024-03-29
- 刊出日期: 2024-03-25

Effectiveness of comprehensive sexuality education curriculum on improving hostile and benevolent sexism among university students

LU Mingqi¹,
GUO Lingfeng¹,
LIU Wenli^{1, 2
, ,}

1.
Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment toward Basic Education Quality, Beijing Normal University, Beijing (100875), China

摘要

摘要: 目的探讨全面性教育课程对大学生敌意和善意性别偏见态度的影响，为评价全面性教育干预矛盾性别偏见的效果提供参考。方法于2018年9月—2019年1月，采用方便抽样方法从北京市抽取1所高校共165名大学生，开展为期5个月(共36节课，每周2节，每节45 min)的全面性教育课程(包括全面性教育与性别研究、性生理与健康、社会性别和性别角色、性别偏见、亲密关系与性别偏见、性别暴力与性别偏见、文化与性别偏见和社会性别与权力)，将选修全面性教育课程的学生纳入干预组(97名)，同校且未参加过性教育课程的学生纳入对照组(68名)。使用矛盾性别偏见量表对课程干预前后两组大学生进行调查，分析全面性教育课程的干预效果。采用χ²检验、方差分析、聚类分析和Kruskal-Wallis检验进行统计学分析。结果接受全面性教育课程后，干预组的敌意和善意性别偏见评分(2.21±0.76，2.36±0.68)均低于对照组(2.81±0.61，3.03±0.60)(F值分别为17.24，33.26)和干预组前测评分(2.64±0.67，2.88±0.68)(F值分别为45.62，66.93)(P值均 < 0.01)。在敌意和善意性别偏见评分上，女生评分(2.46±0.72，2.65±0.70)均低于男生(2.86±0.59，3.09±0.69)(F值分别为11.02，14.20，P值均 < 0.01)。敌意和善意性别偏见不同聚类组别的干预效果比较显示，不一致型的敌意性别偏见评分差值0.63(0.25，1.25)高于一致较高型0.38(-0.16，0.88)和一致较低型0.38(0.06，0.63)(H=8.71，P < 0.05)；一致较高型的善意性别偏见评分差值0.75(0.53，1.22)高于一致较低型0.38(0.09，0.88)和不一致型0.38(-0.13，0.63)(H=10.82，P < 0.05)。结论全面性教育能够改善大学生敌意和善意性别偏见，并具有性别和类型差异。应关注全面性教育课程，改善大学生矛盾性别偏见，以期培养大学生的性别平等意识。
- 性教育 /
- 偏见 /
- 学生 /
- 干预性研究
Abstract: Objective To explore the effectiveness of a comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) curriculum on university students' hostile and benevolent sexism, so as to provide a reference for evaluating the effects of CSE on reducing ambivalent sexism. Methods From September 2018 to January 2019, 165 university students from a university in Beijing were recruited using convenience sampling for a 5-month of CSE curriculum (36 sessions, 2 sessions per week, 45 min per session), including CSE and gender studies, sexual physiology and health, gender and gender roles, gender bias, intimate relationships and gender bias, gender-based violence and gender bias, culture and gender bias, and gender and power. Students who took CSE curriculum were included in the intervention group (n=97) and students from the same university who had not taken CSE curriculum were included in the control group (n=68). Using the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, both groups of university students were surveyed before and after the curriculum to analyze the effectiveness of the CSE curriculum. Chi-square test, ANOVA, cluster analysis and Kruskal Wallis test were used for statistical analysis. Results After the CSE curriculum, both hostile and benevolent sexism scores were lower in the intervention group (2.21±0.76, 2.36±0.68) than in the control group (2.81±0.61, 3.03±0.60) (F=17.24, 33.26), and pre-test scores were higher in the intervention group (2.64±0.67, 2.88±0.68) (F=45.62, 66.93) (P < 0.01). On both hostile and benevolent sexism, female students' scores (2.46±0.72, 2.65±0.70) were lower than male students' scores (2.86±0.59, 3.09±0.69) (F=11.02, 14.20, P < 0.01). Comparison of the curriculum effectiveness of hostile and benevolent sexism among clustered groups showed that the difference in hostile sexism scores was higher in the inconsistent type [0.63(0.25, 1.25)]than in the more consistent type [0.38(-0.16, 0.88)] and the lower consistent type [0.38(0.06, 0.63)] (H=8.71, P < 0.05); and the difference in benevolent sexism scores was higher in the more consistent type [0.75(0.53, 1.22)] than in the less consistent type [0.38(0.09, 0.88)] and inconsistent type [0.38(-0.13, 0.63)] (H=10.82, P < 0.05). Conclusions CSE can improve hostile and benevolent sexism in university students with sex and type differences. Attention should be paid to CSE curriculum to improve ambivalent sexism among university students with a view to fostering their awareness of gender equality.
- Sex education /
- Sexism /
- Students /
- Intervention studies
注释:

1) 利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。

HTML全文

表 1 干预组和对照组大学生课程干预前后敌意和善意性别偏见评分性别间比较(x±s)

Table 1. Comparison of hostile and benevolent sexism scores of different sexual students in the intervention and control groups between pre- and post-tests(x±s)

组别	测试时间	人数	敌意性别偏见			善意性别偏见
组别	测试时间	人数	男生	女生	总分	男生	女生	总分
干预组	前测	97	3.05±0.49	2.51±0.67	2.64±0.67	3.17±0.75	2.79±0.63	2.88±0.68
	后测	97	2.64±0.79	2.07±0.70	2.21±0.76	2.63±0.75	2.27±0.63	2.36±0.68
对照组	前测	68	2.81±0.51	2.78±0.59	2.79±0.56	3.25±0.59	2.87±0.73	3.01±0.70
	后测	68	2.92±0.48	2.74±0.67	2.81±0.61	3.27±0.51	2.88±0.61	3.03±0.60

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(24)

[1]	戴维·迈尔斯. 社会心理学[M]. 侯玉波, 乐国安, 张智勇, 等, 译. 11版. 北京: 人民邮电出版社, 2016: 304-315. MYERS D G. Social psychology[M]. HOU Y B, LE G A, ZHANG Z Y, et al, translated. 11 th ed. Beijing: People's Posts and Telecommunications Press, 2016: 304-315. (in Chinese)
[2]	GLICK P, FISKE S T. The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism[J]. J Person Soc Psychol, 1996, 70 (3): 491-512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
[3]	CHRISTOPHER A N, WOJDA M R. Social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, sexism, and prejudice toward women in the workforce[J]. Psychol Women Q, 2008, 32(1): 65-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00407.x
[4]	OECD. SIGI 2023 global report: gender equality in times of crisis[M]. Paris: OECD Library, 2023.
[5]	BARRETO M, ELLEMERS N. The burden of benevolent sexism: how it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities[J]. Eur J Soc Psychol, 2005, 35(5): 633-642. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.270
[6]	BECKER J C, SWIM J K. Seeing the unseen: attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs[J]. Psychol Women Q, 2011, 35(2): 227-242. doi: 10.1177/0361684310397509
[7]	LAMARCHE V M, SEERY M D, KONDRAK C L, et al. Clever girl: benevolent sexism and cardiovascular threat[J]. Biol Psychol, 2020, 149: 107781. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2019.107781
[8]	JONES K, STEWART K, KING E, et al. Negative consequence of benevolent sexism on efficacy and performance[J]. Gend Manage, 2014, 29(3): 171-189.
[9]	HILLS P J, SEIB E, PLEVA M, et al. Consent, wantedness, and pleasure: three dimensions affecting the perceived stress of and judgements of rape in sexual encounters[J]. J Exp Psychol Appl, 2020, 26(1): 171-197. doi: 10.1037/xap0000221
[10]	DURÁN M, MOYA M, MEGÍAS J L. Benevolent sexist ideology attributed to an abusive partner decreases women's active coping responses to acts of sexual violence[J]. J Interpers Violence, 2014, 29(8): 1380-1401. doi: 10.1177/0886260513507134
[11]	马川. 当他们谈论"性"时他们在谈论什么: 基于对22名大学生性价值观的深度访谈分析[J]. 中国性科学, 2017, 26(12): 132-136. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XKXZ201712047.htm MA C. What they talk about when they are talking about sex: based on the in depth interview of 22 college students about sexual values[J]. Chin J Human Sex, 2017, 26(12): 132-136. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XKXZ201712047.htm
[12]	KETTING E, BROCKSCHMIDT L, IVANOVA O. Investigating the 'C' in CSE: implementation and effectiveness of comprehensive sexuality education in the WHO European Region[J]. Sex Educ, 2021, 21(2): 133-147. doi: 10.1080/14681811.2020.1766435
[13]	ZHAO P, YANG L, SA Z, et al. Propriety, empowerment and compromise: challenges in addressing gender among sex educators in China[J]. Sex Educ, 2020, 20(5): 552-567. doi: 10.1080/14681811.2019.1705779
[14]	UNESCO. International technical guidance on sexuality education(Revis Edit)[R]. Paris: UNESCO, 2018.
[15]	HABERLAND N, ROGOW D. Sexuality education: emerging trends in evidence and practice[J]. J Adolesc Health, 2015, 56(1): S15-S21. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.013
[16]	刘敬云, 刘文利. 基于性知识和性别刻板印象的小学性教育课程效果评价[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2019, 40(3): 350-354. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2019.03.010 LIU J Y, LIU W L. Effectiveness of sexuality education curriculum in primary schools based on sexual health knowledge and gender stereotypes[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2019, 40(3): 350-354. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2019.03.010
[17]	刘敬云, 刘文利. 小学性健康教育课程对减少艾滋病歧视的效果评价[J]. 中国健康教育, 2019, 35(12): 1108-1110, 1121. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201912013.htm LIU J Y, LIU W L. Evaluation of the effect of school-based sexuality education in reducing AIDS discrimination in primary school[J]. Chin J Health Educ, 2019, 35(12): 1108-1110, 1121. (in Chinese) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201912013.htm
[18]	陈志霞, 何芳玲. 矛盾性别偏见与家庭权力相关婚恋观念的相关研究[C]//中国社会学会性别社会学专业委员会. 2009年中国社会学年会"中国社会变迁与女性发展"论坛论文集. 武汉: 华中科技大学社会学系, 2009: 66-67. CHEN Z X, HE F L. The correlation of ambivalent sexism and marital power-related gender-role ideology on marriage[C]//Gender Sociology Committee of the Chinese Sociological Association. Collection of papers from the forum on Social Change and Women's Development in China at the 2009 China Sociology Annual Conference. Wuhan: School of Sociology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2009: 66-67. (in Chinese)
[19]	SA Z, TIAN L, WANG X. Evidence for a comprehensive sexuality education intervention that enhances Chinese adolescents' sexual knowledge and gender awareness and empowers young women[J]. Sex Roles, 2021, 85: 357-370. doi: 10.1007/s11199-021-01223-8
[20]	CHI X, HAWK S T, WINTER S, et al. The effect of comprehensive sexual education program on sexual health knowledge and sexual attitude among college students in Southwest China[J]. Asia Pac J Public Health, 2015, 27(2): NP2049-NP2066. doi: 10.1177/1010539513475655
[21]	BARTOş S E, BERGER I, HEGARTY P. Interventions to reduce sexual prejudice: a study-space analysis and Meta-analytic review[J]. J Sex Res, 2014, 51(4): 363-382. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2013.871625
[22]	ROGOW D, HABERLAND N, DEL VALLE A, et al. Integrating gender and rights into sexuality education: field reports on using it's all one[J]. Reprod Health Matters, 2013, 21(41): 154-166. doi: 10.1016/S0968-8080(13)41699-3
[23]	KENIG N, KOSTOVSKI D. Gender differences in the effects of comprehensive sexuality education[J]. J ReAttach Ther Dev Divers, 2019, 2(1): 40-50.
[24]	ROSEN N L, NOFZIGER S. Boys, bullying, and gender roles: how hegemonic masculinity shapes bullying behavior[J]. Gend Issues, 2019, 36(3): 295-318. doi: 10.1007/s12147-018-9226-0