ArticlePloS one2025
Beyond the spotlight: Unveiling the gender bias curtain in movie reviews.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Representations of female characters in Bollywood cinema: stereotypes, audience perceptions, and societal impacts.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Historically, the film industry has been male-dominated both in front of and behind the camera, resulting in a longstanding gender imbalance in storytelling and representation. This legacy of male-centric narratives may unconsciously influence critics' expectations and judgments. Existing literature suggests that negative critiques in movie reviews can significantly impact actors' earnings by diminishing a film's commercial prospects. This influence extends to potential reductions in back-end compensation and marketability for future projects, and it can directly affect actors' well-being, leading to increased stress levels and elevated cardiovascular reactivity. Previously, gender biases in movie reviews were computed using disparities in male-led versus female-led movie ratings or box-office earnings; however, no work has been done to quantify the linguistic biases within movie review transcripts. This work aims to leverage our language-model-powered gender bias detection system to measure benevolent sexism, hostile sexism, explicit marking of sex, dehumanization, and generic pronouns in reviews published by professional critics. Therefore, we analyzed 17,165 professionally written reviews, comprising a total of 735,000 sentences. Our analysis uncovers pronounced representation bias in key movie roles, with 72% of first actors, 91% of first directors, and 86% of first writers being male. More importantly, the findings indicate that movies with female-dominated casts evoke, on average, 149% higher magnitude of hostile sexism and 44% higher magnitude of benevolent sexism in their reviews compared to movies with male-dominated casts. We also find that benevolent sexism is most common in Family and Music genres, reflecting the romanticization of gender roles, whereas hostile sexism peaks in Romance. A non-parametric statistical analysis revealed significant gender differences in benevolent and hostile sexism scores for movie reviews, with female first actors, directors, and writers receiving higher levels of both benevolent and hostile sexist criticism compared to their male counterparts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.