Beauticians are all men? Gygax et al. (2008) revisited.

For about 40 years, the question of whether language shapes thought has been resurging again and again, usually in the center of debates about non-sexist use of language. Experimental studies on the interaction between generic masculine terms and their cognitive effects mostly show that generic masculine terms, contrary to their linguistic alternatives (e.g., dual forms), tend to prioritize male over female associations in the minds of the subjects (cf. Braun et al., 2005; Gygax et al., 2008). While all these psycholinguistic studies analyze the topic under a new perspective, each of them also uses a very different research method. Yet, given the controversial and very emotional social debate on gender-fair language, there seems to be an urgent need for interchangeable data: to support the ongoing debate, it is crucial to investigate if prior findings can be considered to be stable. When it comes to answering the question whether the use of gender-fair language is beneficial to the equal cognitive representation of men and women, Gygax et al.’s study (2008) is one of the most cited ones. While its findings are of utmost interest, the study has never been replicated. In my talk, I will therefore carefully examine Gygax et al.’s findings concerning their French sample and compare them to mine, switching from French speaking Switzerland to France. While evaluating the outcomes of the original and the replication study, the effect of the stereotype of the analyzed role name (e.g., Fr. assistants_{M.PL_female stereotype}), which was not found in the original study, will be discussed. The partial replication will thus convey a more nuanced understanding of prior claims and hopefully contribute to a well-grounded implementation of gender-fair language within our societies.