Men estimate higher rates of sexual objectification than women report

Men and women have different perceptions of how often young women experience sexual objectification, with men sometimes estimating higher frequencies than women themselves report. The study, published in Sex Roles, highlights a disconnect in how different behaviors are perceived and measured. The findings challenge the assumption that men underestimate the everyday harassment women face.

Sexual objectification involves treating a person primarily as a body or a collection of body parts rather than a whole human being. This experience is common for many young women and is linked to negative psychological outcomes like depression, body shame, and a reduced sense of personal safety. In professional and public spaces, these experiences range from unwanted explicit sexual advances to everyday instances of inappropriate body evaluation. Researchers wanted to know if men and women had a shared understanding of how frequently these events happen in daily life.

Olivia A. Foster-Gimbel of Rutgers University and Renee Engeln of Northwestern University conducted the study. The researchers initially predicted that men would estimate lower rates of sexual objectification than women actually experienced. They reasoned that men might lack personal experience with being targeted or might be motivated to downplay the issue to maintain a positive view of their own gender group. Additionally, members of a dominant group often struggle to recognize the disadvantages faced by others.

On the other hand, the researchers recognized that the cultural impact of the #MeToo movement might have successfully educated men about the pervasive nature of these experiences. With so many public discussions about sexual harassment and assault in recent years, men might be highly aware of the issues women navigate on a regular basis. To test these competing ideas, the researchers designed a series of three investigations.

The researchers recruited 110 participants between the ages of 18 and 30 for their first study. Women were asked to report how often they personally experienced various objectifying behaviors on a scale ranging from “never” to “almost always.” Men were asked to estimate how often the average young woman had these same experiences using the identical scale. The behaviors were grouped into two categories: overt actions like catcalling or unwanted touching, and covert actions like staring or evaluating a woman’s physical appearance.

The results contradicted the researchers’ initial expectations. Men estimated that the average woman experienced both overt and covert sexual objectification more frequently than the women reported experiencing it themselves. There were no meaningful differences in how men and women perceived the emotional impact of these events. Both groups agreed on how bad these experiences made women feel, suggesting men understood the negative emotional toll of the behavior.

To explore whether men and women were simply interpreting the verbal rating scale differently, the researchers conducted a second study with 199 university students. Participants again provided ratings from “never” to “almost always,” but this time they also provided a specific numerical estimate, such as a set number of times per year. This allowed the researchers to see if words like “frequently” meant the same thing to both groups. Both men and women also read a short vignette about a fictional woman who was catcalled on her way home from work, and then estimated how often this type of event happened to women like the character in the story.

Once again, men estimated that the average woman experienced higher rates of objectification than the women reported for themselves. This pattern held true for both the verbal scale and the numerical count, showing it was not just a misunderstanding of the scale’s wording. When rating the fictional woman in the story, the pattern reversed. Women estimated that the character experienced this overt harassment more often than men did. This suggested that women might report lower rates of objectification for themselves than they do for other women, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as the denial of personal discrimination.

For the third study, the researchers recruited 165 university students and asked both men and women to estimate frequencies for the “average woman” aged 18 to 30. This approach allowed the researchers to compare expectations directly without the complication of women rating their own personal experiences. Participants evaluated both overt and covert behaviors using the verbal scale and the numerical count. They also provided written explanations for why men and women might differ in their estimates.

When imagining the average woman, the results depended heavily on the type of behavior in question. For overt behaviors like catcalling, women selected higher verbal frequency categories than men did, but their actual numerical estimates were roughly the same. Both groups estimated that overt objectification happened about 30 times a year. For covert behaviors like leering, the verbal scale ratings were similar between the genders, but men estimated a much higher numerical count, guessing that covert objectification happened 365 times a year compared to the estimate of 267 times provided by women.

The written responses revealed several potential reasons for these discrepancies. Nearly half of the participants suggested that men’s higher estimates might stem from their awareness of how often they or other men perpetrate these behaviors. Others noted that women might not always notice covert actions like being stared at from behind. Some respondents also proposed that men might deliberately guess higher numbers to avoid seeming ignorant or insensitive in a cultural climate that encourages believing women.

The researchers note a few limitations to keep in mind when interpreting these results. The study only included participants who identified as either men or women. This leaves out the experiences and perceptions of transgender and nonbinary individuals, who also face high rates of sexual objectification. A general reader might assume these findings apply to all age groups, but the research focused exclusively on perceptions of women between the ages of 18 and 30.

Future research could explore how estimates of sexual objectification change when considering older women or women of different racial backgrounds. Different communities experience and interpret objectification in varying ways, which could alter the numerical estimates and perceptions of frequency. Additionally, the data were collected in the years immediately following the peak of the #MeToo movement. Social attitudes continue to shift, and subsequent surveys will be needed to see if these patterns hold up over time. Ultimately, focusing workplace and social interventions on the negative mental health impacts of objectification might be more effective than debating exactly how often it occurs.

The study, “A Mile in Her Heels: Do Men and Women Agree on How Often Women Are Sexually Objectified?,” was authored by Olivia A. Foster-Gimbel and Renee Engeln.