Hostile Sexism and Ambivalent Sexism Scale (HSAS)

Description

The Hostile Sexism and Ambivalent Sexism Scale (HSAS) is a psychometric instrument designed to assess sexist attitudes and beliefs toward women. The scale is grounded in the Ambivalent Sexism Theory, which proposes that gender prejudice is expressed not only through overtly hostile attitudes but also through seemingly positive beliefs that reinforce traditional gender stereotypes and social inequality.

The HSAS evaluates two fundamental dimensions of sexism:

  • Hostile Sexism, which reflects openly negative, antagonistic, or discriminatory attitudes toward women, particularly those perceived as challenging traditional gender roles or existing power structures.
  • Ambivalent (Benevolent) Sexism, which encompasses subjectively positive or protective beliefs that idealize women while simultaneously promoting dependency, traditional gender expectations, and unequal social relationships.

By assessing both dimensions simultaneously, the HSAS provides a comprehensive understanding of gender-related prejudice and the subtle mechanisms through which sexism is maintained within modern societies. The instrument has been widely applied in psychology, sociology, education, organizational research, and gender studies to investigate attitudes toward gender equality and discrimination.

Data Analysis

Data obtained from the HSAS are analyzed using established psychometric and statistical techniques to evaluate both the reliability of the instrument and the prevalence of sexist attitudes within a population.

Internal consistency is commonly assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, while the factorial structure of the questionnaire may be examined through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Construct validity can be further evaluated by examining associations with related constructs such as gender role ideology, social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, prejudice, and attitudes toward equality.

Researchers frequently compare HSAS scores across demographic variables including age, gender, educational level, occupation, cultural background, and political orientation. Correlation, regression, mediation, moderation, and structural equation modeling (SEM) are often employed to investigate the psychological and social factors associated with sexist beliefs.

The HSAS is extensively used in:

  • Psychological and social science research
  • Gender equality and diversity studies
  • Organizational and occupational psychology
  • Educational research
  • Public policy evaluation
  • Cross-cultural and international comparative studies

Objective

The primary objective of the HSAS is to provide a reliable and valid assessment of both explicit and subtle forms of sexism.

More specifically, the instrument aims to:

  • Measure levels of hostile sexism toward women.
  • Assess benevolent (ambivalent) sexist attitudes that reinforce traditional gender roles.
  • Examine how sexist beliefs influence interpersonal relationships and workplace interactions.
  • Investigate the relationship between sexism and broader psychological and social variables.
  • Support the development and evaluation of educational, organizational, and public interventions designed to promote gender equality and reduce discrimination.

Scoring

The HSAS is typically scored using a Likert-type response scale, commonly ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 or 7 (Strongly Agree), depending on the version of the questionnaire.

Responses are summed separately for each dimension to produce:

  • A Hostile Sexism score.
  • An Ambivalent (Benevolent) Sexism score.
  • When appropriate, an overall sexism index.

Certain items may require reverse scoring before calculating the final scores. Higher scores indicate stronger endorsement of sexist beliefs and greater acceptance of traditional gender stereotypes.

Interpretation

HSAS scores should be interpreted within the demographic, cultural, and social context of the assessed population. The instrument is intended to measure attitudes rather than classify individuals.

Higher scores on the Hostile Sexism dimension indicate stronger openly negative attitudes toward women, whereas elevated Ambivalent (Benevolent) Sexism scores suggest greater endorsement of paternalistic beliefs that appear positive but ultimately reinforce gender inequality.

The findings can inform academic research, diversity and inclusion initiatives, educational programs, workplace equality policies, and interventions aimed at reducing gender-based prejudice and promoting social inclusion.

References

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An Ambivalent Alliance: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism as Complementary Justifications for Gender Inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118.

Connor, R. A., Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2017). Ambivalent Sexism in the Twenty-First Century. In C. G. Sibley & F. K. Barlow (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Prejudice.

Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and Racism: Old-Fashioned and Modern Prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.