Talk:Ambivalent prejudice

Comprehensive Article Expansion
As part of a class project, I will be editing this article. I plan to expand it to include information on the empirical studies on ambivalent prejudice including the measures used and examples, mechanisms and underlying causes, consequences, mitigation, and criticisms. If anyone has any recommendations or helpful information on how to proceed with the article, I would love to hear them. Brodgers15 (talk) 23:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review
I think that this contribution does not only enhance what was already included in the original article, but really helped make this article more comprehensive as a whole. Your writing style was very easy to follow and your sourcing helped add to the credibility of the article. My only suggestion would be that if you have time, maybe go back and add more sections on even more minority groups that may be vulnerable to ambivalent prejudice (such as Hispanic and Asian Americans or the LGBT community). Dmillar23 (talk) 01:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Redundancy
"This is due to male ambivalence having three sources: paternalism, gender differentiation, and heterosexuality.[2][9] This assessment measures an individual's endorsement of ambivalent sexism. The theory of ambivalent sexism postulates that male ambivalence has three sources: paternalism, gender differentiation, and heterosexuality."

Because this phrase is used as the end of one thought and the beginning of another thought, I'm not sure which one should be deleted. It's awkward to read as is. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harmonex (talk • contribs) 06:11, 30 October 2021 (UTC)