Are Girls Actually Taking the Lead?
A Content Analysis of Gender Roles in Animated Netflix Originals for Children
Daphne M. van Tongeren
12760196
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Master’s Program Communication Science: Entertainment Communication
University of Amsterdam
Supervisor: Dr. M.E. Klijn
June 26, 2020
Abstract
Television shows for children provide their audience with displays of characters portrayed with personality traits and behaviours in line with or countering gender stereotypical representations of gender. This content analysis looked at behaviours and characteristics of female and male characters in animated Netflix Original shows for children and made a comparison between the display of behaviours and characteristics among shows from the category “girls take the lead” and shows that were not in this category. The analysis showed that there remain more male characters (65.0%) in the other shows, but more female characters (56.1%) were found in “girls take the lead” shows. Several gender stereotypes found in previous research were not found in the animated Netflix Originals. Moreover, “girls take the lead” shows were found to be somewhat less gender stereotypical, yet there remain many points of improvements. The results are discussed along the lines of cultivation theory and social cognitive theory, and the implications and possible future research directions are discussed as well.
Key words: gender representation, stereotyping, children, animated Netflix Originals,
content analysis
2
Contents
Abstract ...... 2
Introduction ...... 4
Literature review ...... 6 Theoretical framework...... 6 Television habits of children ...... 6 Gender stereotyping in the media ...... 8 Gender stereotyping and children ...... 8
Methods ...... 17 Sample ...... 17 Analysis ...... 18 Units of analysis ...... 19 Variables ...... 19
Results ...... 21 Demographic representation ...... 21 Physical character attributes ...... 22 Personality attributes ...... 23
Discussion ...... 24
Conclusion and implications ...... 28
References ...... 30
Tables ...... 38
Appendix A: Code book ...... 42
Appendix B: Coding sheet ...... 51
Appendix C: Netflix Originals episodes overview...... 53
Appendix D: Intercoder reliability ...... 56
3
Introduction
Gender stereotypes are part of the media people consume, influencing how people perceive the world (Bussey & Bandura, 1999; Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shannahan, 2002).
Gender stereotyping entails portraying characters in stereotypical ways, with certain characteristics and behaviours typically assigned to male and female characters (Bussey &
Bandura, 1999). Research into gender stereotypes has been ongoing for different media (e.g.
Aubrey & Frisby, 2011; Browne, 1998; Dill & Thill, 2007; Wallis, 2011). Previous content analyses focused on gender representation on television included findings that male and female characters are not represented equally in numbers, and that there are many stereotypes assigned to both genders (e.g. Aubrey & Harrison, 2004; Sink & Mastro, 2017; Thompson & Zerbinos,
1995). Little research has focused on gender representation in content for children, however similar findings were reported (Hentges and Case, 2013; Pila, Dobrow, Gidney, & Burton, 2018).
Considering that media plays an important role in the socialisation of children (Prot et al., 2015) and the creation of their gender identity (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017) underlines the importance to increase the knowledge on gender representation in content currently offered to children.
The negative effects of gender stereotypes in the media have come forward in multiple studies. The consumption of television with gender stereotypes leads to traditional gender role development (Freuh & McGhee, 1975) and gender stereotypical behaviour and attitudes
(Oppliger, 2007). Many character attributes are often presented as stereotypically masculine, potentially giving children the idea that these are not achievable or desirable for girls, such as being adventurous, intelligent, and taking the lead (e.g. Hentges & Case, 2013; Thompson &
Zerbinos, 1995). Furthermore, the representation of male and female characters with certain characteristics, or the lack thereof, can send out messages to viewers about what they should or 4 should not behave like or aspire to. Certain representations can also result in negative effects, such as aggressive representation resulting in aggressive behaviour (Bender, Plante, & Gentile,
2018; Paik & Comstock, 1994), or the recurring view of thin characters leading to lower body satisfaction or unhealthy dieting (Botta, 1999; Dohnt & Tiggemann, 2006; Thomsen, Weber, &
Brown, 2002). These representations will be considered, in addition to other gender stereotypical representations.
There is a decrease in time children spend watching television and an increase in the time they spend watching video-on-demand services like Netflix (Ofcom, 2020; Lauf & Scholtens,
2019). This makes for Netflix to be an important source of media messages for children, and hence important as subject for study. Netflix organises its content for children in numerous categories. Despite the fact that Netflix has not publicly announced an agenda when it comes to producing content with characters that girls can aspire to, the category “girls take the lead” gives an impression of wanting to provide content with independent, strong female characters that girls can look up to. Netflix has created original content since 2013, which means all Netflix Originals have been created fairly recently.
The purpose of this content analysis is to create an updated picture of how gender representation is depicted in animated Netflix Original shows for children. This is achieved by comparing shows sorted into “girls take the lead” with shows sorted into other categories. The insights obtained can guide parents and caretakers when regulating their children’s content and highlight points of improvement for producers. Content is examined in communication research as it is often seen as the cause of certain effects (Riffe, Lacy, Watson, & Fico, 2019), and is therefore important to be considered. Though no effects on children will be investigated, the findings will be discussed along the lines of cultivation theory and social cognitive theory, to underline the effects that gender representation in shows can have on children. The main research 5 question that will be explored is: How does gender representation differ between animated
Netflix Original “girls take the lead” shows and other animated Netflix Originals for children?
Literature review
Theoretical framework
Cultivation theory and social cognitive theory help understand the possible effects of the representation of gender in shows on how children perceive the world around them. The theories suggest that gender stereotyping on television plays a role in the development of children’s gendered beliefs and behaviour (Bussey & Bandura, 1999; Gerbner et al., 2002). Cultivation theory (Gerbner et al., 2002) states that through the repetition of messages, values, and standards, people’s views of the world come to represent the televised images they consume. The selective exposure to groups, such as women, shape cultural perceptions regarding these groups. Social cognitive theory explains how mass media like television contain models that viewers can internalise and imitate in real-world social interactions (Bussey & Bandura, 1999). Children were found to attend closely to same gendered models, from which they learn what it means to be male and female (Bandura & Bussey, 2004).
Television habits of children
Where traditionally watching linear television took up a large part of children’s media consumption, trends show a shift towards video-on-demand (VoD), which has now become an important source of the media messages children consume and their information supply on gender. For example, in the United Kingdom, watching VoD has doubled over the last five years and more children watch VoD than linear television (Ofcom, 2020). In the Netherlands, children are decreasingly watching linear television and increasingly watching shows online, including 6
VoD (Lauf & Scholtens, 2019). Similar tendencies may be expected in other countries, as Netflix has grown to be the market leader in VoD services, with currently over 182 million subscribers worldwide (Statista, 2020). Netflix is available in all countries except for China, Syria, North-
Korea, and Crimea (“Where is Netflix available?”, n.d.).
Many shows produced for children are animated shows (Kirsch, 2010). There is little evidence that children prefer these shows. The reasoning behind the great number of this type of shows is that they are relatively easy and cheap to produce, in addition to having the potential to become very profitable, as they can be distributed to other countries easily as they are not particularly culture or environment specific, in contrast to live action shows (Pila et al., 2018).
Animated shows do not have certain constraints that live action shows have, including that they have freedom in what and who to include, as they do not depend on casting of characters. Despite this, animated shows have been found to be more problematic than live action shows when it comes to representations of gender (Smith & Cook, 2008).
Boys and girls have different media preferences and are therefore not exposed to the same representations of characters. Producers of children shows know about these different preferences
(Lemish, 2010). The notion that girls watch shows with male leads and boys do not watch shows with girl leads has led producers to create mainly shows with male leads (Lemish, 2010;
Thompson & Zerbinos, 1997). This is worrisome as children prefer and identify with same- gendered characters from around the age of five (Bond & Calvert, 2014; Hoffner, 1996). If there is a majority of male characters, it is more difficult for girls to identify with characters they see in shows. As children become more aware of their gender identity and of what are typical behaviours and qualities of boys and girls (Urberg, 1982; Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017), there is a need for characters all children can identify with and that serve as good role models.
7
Gender stereotyping in the media
Research into gender stereotyping has focused on a variety of media. In music videos and games, women were found to be portrayed sexualised and as subordinate, and men as aggressive (Aubrey
& Frisby, 2011; Dill & Thill, 2007; Wallis, 2011). In advertisements, it has been found that boys are more often depicted as knowledgeable, aggressive, active, dominant, and in control (Browne,
1998). In addition, women were found to be underrepresented, which conveys that men require more respect and status, as they are more prominent and therefore important (Gerbner et al.,
2002). These different stereotypes include more character attributes that together make up masculine and feminine stereotypes.
Gender stereotyping and children
The (stereotypical) representation of female and male characters has shown to affect young viewers. A meta-analysis of Oppliger (2007) showed that as gender stereotyping increased, there were more signs of gender-typed behaviour and gender-role stereotyped attitudes. Freuh and
McGhee (1975) found an association between high amounts of television watching and stronger traditional gender role development. In addition to gender stereotypical characteristics, characteristics that are not assigned to specifically male or female characters are of importance as well. Boys and girls are found to look up to same-gendered characters mostly and if those do not portray aspirational behaviour or personality traits, such as taking the lead and being independent, they miss out on seeing positive, empowering images (Lemish, 2010). Research into wishful identification and parasocial relationships with characters showed that nearly all boys named same-gendered characters as favourite, whereas girls only did this for just over half the time
(Hoffner, 1996). This is possibly because the female characters did not display behaviour that girls identified with, whereas the male characters did. 8
The media exposes viewers to models that entail gender-linked behaviour as male and female characters are typically assigned certain attributes and capabilities. Considering content for children, there has not been many recent findings, expressing a need for more attention to this subject. Based on findings related to children shows, in addition to several findings from other television content analyses, the following gender representations and stereotypes were found to be included in this content analysis, in addition to several novel variables of interest.
Demographic representation
Gender. Previous content analyses highlighted that there is an underrepresentation of female characters in television shows. As an update to research done in the 1970s, Thompson and
Zerbinos (1995) looked at if gender roles and representation in animated shows had changed over time, and found a continuance of gender stereotypical representation, and underrepresentation of female characters. Though not focused on children shows specifically, Sink and Mastro (2017) analysed US primetime television and found that the underrepresentation of women persisted.
Especially concerning content for children, Hentges and Case (2013) found an overrepresentation of male characters in all content, regardless of the target audience of content for children. Götz et al. (2008) provided findings from shows of 24 countries worldwide, all of which had less than
50% female characters, with an average of 32%. Similarly, Smith and Cook (2008) found that the male to female character ratio within 1,034 shows from 12 networks was 2:1. Moreover, a recent study of Pila et al. (2018) found that male characters outnumbered female characters nearly two to one in US television shows for children. As the world population consists of 50.4% males and
49.6% females (World Bank, 2019), it is evident that female characters are underrepresented in these shows.
9
In line with the consistent underrepresentation of female characters on television, and the assumption that Netflix “girls take the lead” shows focuses on girls, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1: There is an underrepresentation of female characters, in all shows except for “girls
take the lead” shows.
Importance of character. There is a difference in occurrence of characters and their importance to the plot of the episode or show. Sink and Mastro (2017) defined three different characters: main, minor, and background characters, who differ between importance to the story and how likely they are expected to return in other episodes. As main characters are of more importance to the story, it is interesting to look at distributions of the importance of characters among gender. Thompson and Zerbinos (1995) found that both for main as for minor characters there were more male characters. The following hypothesis will be explored:
H2: There are relatively more male compared to female main characters, in all shows
except “girls take the lead” shows.
Humanity. Besides human characters, there is a variety of non-human characters included in animated shows for children. Though there have not been any previous studies concerning effects of this issue, Hentges and Case (2013) found that male characters were portrayed as non-human characters significantly more often than female characters. Götz et al.
(2008) found similar results, with non-human characters being male considerably more often than female, with 75% of animals being male, and more than 75% of monsters, robots, and other fictional characters being male. Even though no previous study looked into the effects, the portrayal of characters as human or non-human might be important considering the desire for identification with characters (Hoffner, 1996; Lemish, 2010), which may be more difficult with non-human characters. The following hypothesis is proposed: 10
H3: Male characters are depicted as non-human more often than female characters.
Occupation. As children were found to aspire to occupations they see on shows (Wright,
Huston, Truglio, Fitch, Smith, & Piemyat, 1995), it is of interest to see how female and male characters are portrayed when it comes to their occupational role. Previous content analyses have shown that female characters are assigned a working role less often, and if they have a job, their position is found to be less prestigious, or of less power (Collins, 2011; Mendes & Carter, 2008;
Wright et al., 1995). Besides female characters lacking a clear mention of having a job, they were the only ones portrayed as caregivers (Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995). Hence, the following hypothesis will be tested:
H4: Male characters outnumber females in positions of power, and female characters
outnumber male characters in having no visible occupation or no position of power, in all
shows except “girls take the lead” shows.
Physical character attributes
Colour. An attribute that is often used as a gender cue of characters, and is often regarded as specific to gender, is colour. Women are found to prefer warmer, red and purple toned colours, and men blue and green, colder colours (Hulbert & Ling, 2007). Besides a biological preference, there are stereotypical assumptions relating to use of colour and gender. The colours for girls often include pastel colours, warmer colours, and reddish/purple/pink toned-colours (feminine colours), whereas boys are associated with bold, darker, and blue and green toned-colours
(masculine colours) (Auster & Mansbach, 2012).
Colour is also a way for children to express their gender (Chiu et al., 2006; Karniol,
2011). For example, boys were found to avoid using feminine colours, showing their tendency towards masculine colours (Karniol, 2011). In addition, similar avoidance of things considered 11
“girly” and not “masculine” by boys were found in studies on toy play, as boys were more inclined to play with typical same-gendered blue toys than girls (Fagot, Leinbach, & Hagan,
1986).
The continuous use of stereotypical colours in marketing and television shows contributes to the existing assumptions related to said colours. This was found to be a hindrance in the reduction of adult gender biases by Cunningham and Macrae (2011), who examined the impact of colour-gender associations on adult cognition and found that these stereotypes continued to affect judgements of stimuli relating to gender. This shows that both children and adults use cultural proliferation of colour-gender associations as a foundation for activation and application of stereotypes, suggesting that whatever stereotypical associations with colour one creates at a young age continues to affect associations later in life.
No previous research could be found on the use of colour in television shows as a gender identity cue. This research will look into the use of colour and see if this is in accordance with gender stereotypical use of colour found in for example marketing methods. The following hypothesis will be tested:
H5: Male characters are more often assigned masculine colours than female characters
and female characters are more often assigned feminine colours than male characters, in
all shows except “girls take the lead” shows.
Appearance. The appearance of characters is also something that has received attention.
Girls are interested in attractive characters (Hoffner, 1996; Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017), incentivising producers to focus on the appearance of characters in shows for girls. Female characters were also found to pay more attention to their appearance than male characters
(Hentges & Case, 2013), suggesting that female characters care more for their appearance.
12
As a part of physical appearance there is also a focus on the body weight of characters.
Mass media has often been found to portray a “thin ideal”, underlining the importance of body weight, in addition to showing more thin characters than average or heavy characters, and to portray the thin characters as more attractive (Klein & Shiffman, 2005). Götz et al. (2008) found that female characters are portrayed as thin more than twice as often compared to male characters and male characters are twice as often portrayed as heavy.
There are several worrisome effects relating to the portrayal of characters when it comes to their appearance and body weight. A relation was found between watching content containing physical appearance ideals and poor body image (Dohnt & Tiggemann, 2006); self-destructive behaviour such as unhealthy dieting (Thomsen, Weber, & Brown, 2002); and a desire for being thin, bulimic behaviour, thin-ideal endorsements, and higher body dissatisfaction (Botta, 1999).
The meta-analysis by Stice (2002) pointed out that a perceived pressure to be thin for both children and adults is a causal risk factor for amongst others dieting, body dissatisfaction, and bulimic pathology. The pressure to be thin in the media contributes to an incorporation of the thin ideal (Anschutz, Engels, and Van Strien, 2011; Stice, 2002). Besides a desire for obtaining certain body types as portrayed in the media, children were also found to associate positive traits to thin and average-sized characters and negative traits to heavy characters (Kirkpatrick &
Sanders, 1978; Tiggemann & Wilson-Barrett, 1998). The following hypotheses will be explored:
H6: Female characters pay more attention to their own appearance or the appearance of
others than male characters, in all shows except “girls take the lead” shows.
H7: Female characters are portrayed more as above average appearance and thin than
male characters, in all shows except “girls take the lead” shows.
13
Personality attributes
Aggression. Research on aggression focused mostly on physical aggression, a violent action with the purpose of causing pain, bodily harm, or death to another. Girls up to the age of
18 are more likely to display social aggression than boys, as girls’ standing in the social world is particularly important to them (Coyne, Archer, & Eslea, 2006). Social aggression entails behaviour with the intent of damaging another person’s self-esteem, social status, or both. This includes amongst others spreading rumours, insulting, or directing negative facial expressions towards someone (Coyne, Archer, & Eslea, 2006).
The effects of media display on aggression constitutes an ongoing debate with inconclusive results. Meta-analyses show that, in general, media violence including physical aggression statistically has a small to moderate effect on direct aggressive behaviour (e.g.
Bender, Plante, & Gentile, 2018; Paik & Comstock, 1994). However, there are multiple factors that mediate the effect. For example, younger children, children with an aggressive temperament, and children with difficult home situations are more likely to be affected by violence they see in the media (Valkenburg & Piotrowski, 2017). Social aggression has received less attention in research. Coyne, Archer and Eslea (2004) did look at the effects of social aggression on children aged 11 to 14 and found the first evidence of how viewing social aggression in the media can influence subsequent aggression. Despite inconclusiveness about the effects, the fact that younger children seem to be more likely influenced by violence they see on television makes it an important factor to consider in research.
Multiple studies looked at the display of aggression on television. When it comes to children’s animated shows, male characters displayed more physical aggression than female characters (Thompson and Zerbinos, 1995; Leaper, Breed, Hoffman, & Perlman, 2002), in addition to female characters displaying more social aggression (Coyne & Archer, 2004; Luther 14
& Legg, 2010). Sink and Mastro’s (2017) analysis found male characters to be more physically and verbally aggressive, and more likely to bully than female characters. Moreover, they showed that social aggression is more likely to be accepted when characters are considered of above average appearance. In addition, aggression of female characters is more often accepted than that of male characters as their aggression is seen as acceptable in what they want to achieve. Female characters are less likely to be punished and more likely to be rewarded, which can give the impression that aggression is acceptable because it is justified (Coyne & Archer, 2004). To understand what displays of aggression are included in relation to gender, this study will look into the following hypotheses:
H8: Female characters display more social aggression than male characters and male
characters display more physical aggression than female characters.
H9: Female characters and characters with above average appearance are more likely to
have their aggression accepted
Masculine stereotypes. There are several characteristics that are often found to be assigned to men and linked to male characters in the media. Presenting male and not female characters with certain characteristics confirms the stereotypical depictions of these characteristics and could affect how children perceive gendered beliefs and behaviour (Bussey &
Bandura, 1999; Gerbner et al., 2002). Hence, it is important to get an understanding of how these character attributes are assigned to female and male characters.
Adventurous. A part of the masculine stereotype is the desire for action and adventure
(Scharrer, 2004). In addition, content for boys often revolves around action and adventure
(Leaper, Breed, Hoffman, & Perlman, 2002; Bussey & Bandura, 1999; Gerding & Signorielli,
2014; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995). Though this has not gained attention in research, there
15 might be a difference between the desire characters express for action or adventure and if this desire is followed by the actual pursuit of action or adventure.
Comic role. The use of humour in shows is found to be of importance to especially male audiences (Aubrey & Harrison, 2004). However, humour was an important character trait in the wishful identification of girls with male characters, showing that girls also value humour in characters (Hoffner, 1996). Male characters were found to portray a comic role more often than female characters (Hentges & Case, 2013).
Intelligence. Content analyses that looked at portrayals of intelligence have provided contrasting results. Thompson and Zerbinos (1995) found female characters to be presented as intelligent more than male characters. In contrast, male characters were found to be presented as intelligent more often by Ahmed and Wahab (2014). When comparing male and female scientists, an occupation requiring intelligence, in amongst others animated shows for children, there were significantly more male scientists (Long et al., 2010). For both girls and boys, intelligence was found to be an important character trait in predicting wishful identification, underlining that both genders are interested in seeing intelligent characters in the shows they watch (Hoffner, 1996). The results show a slight tendency towards more males being portrayed as intelligent.
Dominance. Male characters are portrayed as being more dominant, that is, as influential, important, and powerful in an interaction, than female characters (Sink & Mastro, 2017). This was confirmed for animated shows as well (Ahmed & Wahab, 2014).
Taking the lead. In accordance with stereotypes, male characters were more often found to be presented as leaders (Ahmed & Wahab, 2014; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995). Götz et al.
(2008) found that female characters are more often shown as equals to the other characters, and less often as followers or leaders. 16
Dependence. When it comes to dependence, male characters are often portrayed as independent and female characters more often as dependent (Ahmed & Wahab, 2014; Bussey &
Bandura, 1999; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995). Scharrer (2004) noted that one of the hyperfemininity character attributes is dependence on others.
From the previously explained masculine stereotypes, the following hypothesis and additional research question were created:
H10: Male characters are more likely to be portrayed with masculine stereotypes than
female characters, in all shows except “girls take the lead” shows.
RQ1: Is there a gender difference between the desire for action and adventure and the
actual pursuit of action or adventure followed by this desire?
Methods
Sample
The content that was used for this analysis was selected from the children (up to age 12) section of the Dutch Netflix online library. Only Netflix Originals are considered. These are shows produced by Netflix or exclusively broadcasted by Netflix. Moreover, it was noted whether the
Netflix Originals show was included in the “girls take the lead” category or not.
There were several selection criteria for the show to be part of the sampling frame to ensure that the content was comparable to each other, and that the sample would be of manageable size to work with within the time constraints. Firstly, only episodes of around 25 minutes were considered. Several episodes included two or three stories within one episode. In this case, all stories were coded and seen as one. Secondly, only the animated, fictional shows were considered, as these include characters for whom the behaviour was created intentionally.
Moreover, some shows had specials or spin-offs from the original shows. In case this occurred, 17 only the original version of the show was included, as similarity in characters was expected between the original show and the specials or spin-offs. This resulted in a sample of 61 shows, see Appendix C.
For every show in the sample, one episode was selected and coded. A commonality on
Netflix is that the first episode is either shorter or longer than the other episodes. Hence the decision was made to select the second episode of each show. Another reason was to avoid any character introductions in the first episode that would give the coder preconceived ideas about the characters. For the analysis, only the information that could be taken from the show was considered; any previous knowledge about the characters was disregarded. The opening and closing credits were not coded, and the episodes were all watched in English.
The coder watched the episodes to access gender portrayals of female and male characters following the code book in Appendix A and the coding sheet in Appendix B. To ensure that the coding was generalisable, a subsample of roughly 10% (6 episodes in total, from 3 different shows) was first double coded. This sample included 57 characters, who were all coded on 20 variables. The intercoder reliability values of both the main coder and a second coder were analysed and most of the variables reached sufficient intercoder reliability values for
Krippendorff’s alpha (Krippendorff, 2004), ranging between 0.64 and 1.00 (see Appendix D).
Some variables did not reach adequate levels. The code instructions for these variables were adjusted before the main sample was coded.
Analysis
Chi-square tests for independence were used, unless otherwise noted. When a 2 by 2 Chi-square analysis was conducted, Yates’ Correction for Continuity was used. In case the assumption of requiring a minimum frequency of 5 for each cell was violated, Fisher’s Exact Probability Test 18 was used. To identify which cell was contributing to the significance within the Chi-square tests, post hoc tests were conducted by looking at the standardised residuals. In case the z-score was below -1.96 or above 1.96, the cell was regarded as contributing to the significance in the relationship.
Units of analysis
The units of analysis include the characters on the shows. These characters were defined as either a main, minor, or a background character (Sink & Mastro, 2017). Main characters are defined as recurring, regular characters who are central to the storyline and constantly appear on the show.
Minor characters are infrequent, semi regular, or one-time characters who play a supporting role in the episode. Background characters are non-central characters with at least two lines that one would not expect to appear in future episodes.
Variables
The variables that were considered during coding are presented below. For elaborate explanations of the variables including coding directions, see the code book in Appendix A. Several demographic variables were included to get an overview of the characters included in the shows.
The gender, occupation (position of power or not), and humanity (whether the character is human or non-human) of the characters were determined. In addition, other variables specific to the hypotheses and research questions were coded.
Physical character attributes. Firstly, the colours of the clothing, skin (in case the character is non-human), and hair were coded as feminine, masculine, or equally present.
Moreover, whether the character focused on their own appearance or the appearance of others was included (Yes/No). For example, making comments about their own physical appearance or 19 behaving in a way that shows their concern with appearance, such as looking in mirrors, are cues for a focus on their own appearance. This was inspired by the codes used by Hentges and Case
(2013). Furthermore, the appearance and body size of the character were noted, with average as the default option, similar to in research from Klein & Shiffman (2005).
Aggression. Three dimensions of aggression were coded: whether the character displayed physical or social aggression, and if the character’s aggression was accepted by others. A scale of physical aggression was created by Kay, Wolkenfeld, and Murrill (1988). This scale includes various levels of physical aggression, ranging from 0 for displaying no physical aggression to 4 for displaying extreme physical aggression. The most severe type of physical aggression was coded per character. For social aggression, a similar scale ranging from 0 for displaying no social aggression, to 4 for displaying extreme social aggression was created taking items of social aggression as used in research by Coyne, Archer, and Eslea (2006). Finally, it was coded whether the character’s physical or social aggression was accepted by others or not. This becomes clear from the response of the other characters: either characters say something or act out as a response to someone’s display of aggression; voice their disapproval in other ways, or the characters do nothing in response.
Adventurous. Two types of behaviour were coded for action and adventure: the expression of a desire for action and adventure and the actual pursuit of action and adventure. For the desire for action and adventure, the character expressed wanting to go on an adventure, and/or suggested going on an adventure. For the pursuit of action and adventure, the character was coded as actually going on an adventure, or not, or going on an adventure unwillingly.
Other masculine stereotypes. Several other personality characteristics often seen as masculine stereotypes were coded per character. Intelligence was coded with average as default option, and below and above average for characters that clearly deviated from the standard. 20
Comic role was determined by comic behaviour of the character (Yes/No), such as making jokes.
Dominance was also coded (Yes/No), with the options of showing clear dominance (e.g. influential or having control over others), or not dominance. Dependence had the options of being dependent (e.g. reliance on others), independent, or showing a balance between the two options, adapted from Hentges and Case (2013). Finally, it was determined if the character took the lead, if the character showed submissive behaviour, or if the character cooperated.
Results
Demographic representation
61 Netflix Originals were coded, including 584 distinct characters. From all the shows, 18 shows were categorised as “girls take the lead”, including 173 characters. 56.1% (n = 97) were female, and 43.9% (n = 76) were male, no transgender characters were present. A Chi-square goodness- of-fit test showed that there is no significant difference between gender (χ2 (1) = 2.55, p = .110).
Among the shows that were not categorised as “girls take the lead” shows, from here on referred to as the “other shows”, there were 411 characters, of which 35.0% (n = 144) were female and
65.0% (n = 267) were male, which shows a significant difference between the representation of gender (χ2 (1) = 36.81, p < .001). This means that H1 is supported: there is an underrepresentation of female characters in the other shows, but not in “girls take the lead” shows.
H2 predicted that there would be more male main characters than female main characters in all shows except for “girls take the lead” shows. No significant difference was found for the other shows in the distribution of characters (χ2 (2) = 3.01, p = .222). For “girls take the lead” shows, there is a significant difference (χ2 (2) = 19.31, p < .001), which is mainly for the distribution of main characters. There are significantly more female main characters in “girls take
21 the lead” shows, with 53.6% of female characters portraying a main role, compared to 22.4% of male characters portraying a main role. H2 is partially accepted.
As predicted with H3, more male characters were depicted as non-human compared to female characters. However, this was only significant in “girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (3) =
14.09, p = .002). The largest difference in the portrayal of characters was found in the portrayal as animals: 3.1% of female characters were animals and 17.1% of male characters were animals.
H4 looked at the distribution of occupational roles among characters. It was expected that males would relatively outnumber females in positions of power in all shows except “girls take the lead” shows. Contrary to what was hypothesised, male characters did not significantly outnumber female characters in high positions of power in the other shows (χ2 (1) = .032, p =
.858), yet they did significantly outnumber female characters in “girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (1)
= 5.97, p = .015). A further prediction was that female characters would be portrayed having no visible occupational role and low positions of power more than male characters. Female characters were found to hold these positions more than male characters in “girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (1) = 7.31, p = .007) but not in the other shows (χ2 (1) = .75, p = .386). Hence, H4 is partially supported to the extent of the distribution of power in occupation but rejected when it comes to the type of shows, which shows opposite results. For an overview of distribution of the coded variables, see Table 1 & 2.
Physical character attributes
The use of colour as described in H5 has been found to be significantly related to gender for
“girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (2) = 47.32, p < .001) and for the other shows (χ2 (2) = 110.91, p <
.001). Male characters were mostly assigned masculine colours and female characters feminine colours, confirming H5. 22
H6 predicted that female characters pay more attention to their own appearance and the appearance of others compared to male characters. No significant difference was found for either, no matter the type of show (see Table 3 & 4). Therefore, H6 is rejected.
Moreover, the overwhelming majority of characters (84.8%) was classified as of average appearance due to “average” being the default code. Appearance was found to be significantly related to gender in other shows (χ2 (2) = 13.45, p = .001) and “girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (2) =
15.33, p < .001). Female characters were more often of above average appearance than male characters. This held true for all shows, partially rejecting H7. Furthermore, when considering body size, this is also significantly different among gender in the other shows (χ2 (2) = 58.97, p<
.001) and “girls take the lead” shows (χ2 (2) = 23.73, p < .001), with significantly more thin female characters, average male characters, and heavy male characters in the other shows, and significantly more thin female characters in “girls take the lead” shows.
Personality attributes
Several hypotheses concerned social and physical aggression (see Table 5 & 6). H8 proposed that female characters showed more social aggression. This was true for female characters in “girls take the lead” shows, yet insignificant (χ2 (1) = 1.20, p = .273) and not true for the other shows, which is opposite of what was hypothesised. H8 also stated that male characters showed more physical aggression. There was more physical aggression among male characters compared to female characters in the other shows (χ2 (1) = 5.25, p = .022), not in “girls take the lead” shows.
This means H8 is only partially supported. H9 proposed that female characters and characters with above average appearance are more likely to have their aggression accepted. There were no significant differences found between the acceptance of aggression based on gender, nor between the acceptance of aggression and appearance, for all shows. This means that H9 is not supported. 23
H10 proposed that male characters were more likely to portray masculine stereotypes than female characters, particularly in the other shows. The first stereotype, being adventurous, was significantly seen more among male characters, as they were found to pursue significantly more action or adventure than female characters in the other shows (χ2 (2) = 6.26, p = .044). There was no significant difference between gender in “girls take the lead shows”, confirming H10. No significant difference was found in the expression of a desire for action and adventure.
Furthermore, male characters are significantly more portrayed in a comic role compared to female characters, in the other shows (χ2 (1) = 7.73, p = .005) but not in “girls take the lead” shows, also confirming H10. There is no significant difference between gender and intelligence, dominance, taking the lead, or dependence for any of the shows, rejecting H10. These results show that there is only partial support for H10. Detailed results can be found in Tables 7 & 8.
Finally, RQ1 questioned the difference between a desire for action and adventure and the pursuit of action and adventure followed by this desire. No significant difference (χ2 (1) = 3.51, p = .079) was found between female and male characters.
Discussion
The purpose of this content analysis was to discover how male and female characters are portrayed in animated Netflix Originals for children, and specifically how this differs between
“girls take the lead” shows and other shows not categorised among “girls take the lead”. When it comes to the number of characters that were female or male, there was a significant underrepresentation of female characters (35.0%) in the other shows, but an insignificant difference for “girls take the lead” shows, with 56.1% of characters being female. The “girls take the lead” shows have thus moved towards a slightly more equal representation of gender in numbers. From a cultivation perspective, to move towards an equal representation in numbers is 24 important, because sheer representation of gender in media is an indicator of prominence of males and females in society. Consequently, underrepresentation indicates to audiences that certain groups require more respect and status, which eventually normalises attitudes and behaviours in society that correspond with these views (Gerbner et al., 2002). When it comes to the importance of characters, there is no significant difference in the others shows, and significantly more female main characters in “girls take the lead” shows. This contrasts previous findings (Thompson and Zerbinos, 1995), and shows a focus on girls in the “girls take the lead” shows. Fewer female characters are presented as non-human, which means that despite the lower numbers of female characters, there is a larger part of characters they can identify with if identification is more likely with human characters. Research into the effects of character representation as human or non-human is needed to understand how it affects children.
The findings related to occupation are surprising. Though as expected males outnumbered females in high position jobs and females outnumbered males in having no visible occupation or a low position of power, these results were only significant for the “girls take the lead” shows. It was expected that female characters may be less stereotypically displayed when it comes to occupation in “girls take the lead” shows, however, the opposite was found to be true. This shows a more stereotypical depiction of occupation in “girls take the lead” shows.
A character attribute that appeared to be very stereotypically distributed among gender was the use of colour to depict the character. That is, female characters are portrayed with feminine colours and male characters with masculine colours, regardless of the category. No previous research had been found to focus on the use of colour in relation to gender. These results show that colour is possibly used as a key determinant of gender, in a way to distinguish female from male in a binary sense.
25
Female characters have been found to focus on their appearance more than male characters (Hentges & Case, 2013), and are often portrayed as thin (Götz et al.) and attractive because girls are interested in attractive characters (Hoffner, 1996; Valkenburg & Piotrowski,
2017). The results did not find female characters to be more concerned about appearance than male characters. However, female characters were portrayed as of above average appearance and thin more often than male characters in all shows, which means that appearance and body type continue to adhere to previous stereotypes for all animated Netflix Originals. This representation of female characters as beautiful and thin creates certain ideals in girls. Especially the thin aspect needs to be considered with caution as it has been found to be linked to negative effects relating to poor body image, unhealthy dieting, body dissatisfaction, and bulimic pathology (Botta, 1999;
Dohnt & Tiggemann, 2006; Stice, 2002; Thomsen, Weber, & Brown, 2002).
When it comes to aggression, male characters continue to show more physical aggression in the other Netflix Originals, confirming previous stereotypes (Leaper et al, 2002; Luther &
Legg, 2010; Sink & Mastro, 2017; Thompson and Zerbinos, 1995). However, unlike previous findings, female characters did not portray significantly more social aggression. Moreover, unlike previous findings (Coyne & Archer, 2004), gender and appearance did not change the likelihood of acceptance of appearance. Generally, acceptance of aggression was high, which might also be concerning.
Male characters are often found to display certain behaviour or have certain characteristics, such as taking the lead or being intelligent. Through attributing these characteristics to male characters and not assigning these to female characters, girls may miss out on seeing example roles that they can aspire to. Male characters are more adventurous in shows that are not categorised as “girls take the lead”. There is no significant difference in “girls take the lead” shows, which means that female characters are not portrayed as more adventurous. 26
In the other shows, the distribution of comic roles remains stereotypical: more male characters are funny (Hentges & Case, 2013). In “girls take the lead” there is no gender difference when it comes to being funny. When it comes to intelligence, taking the lead, being dominant, and being dependent, there appears to be no difference among gender in animated Netflix Originals, which is different to previous findings (e.g. Ahmed & Wahab, 2014; Long et al., 2010; Sink & Mastro,
2017; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1995), and points towards a less gender stereotypical portrayal when it comes to these characteristics.
Though interesting findings have been concluded from this research, one limitation of this research relates to the coding of gendered behaviours. The variables were coded based on presence or absence of certain behaviour, not on frequency or intensity of the behaviours. This decision was made to increase inter-coder reliability and to create an understanding of which gendered behaviours are displayed by female and male characters overall. Future research could look into the gendered behaviours using continuous variables, which may result in possibly different or more nuanced significant results compared to the results of this study. Furthermore, not all stereotypically gendered behaviours were coded for, which leaves room for further studies to look into more types of gendered behaviours and characteristics.
This study focused on the animated Netflix Originals. Smith & Cook (2008) found animated shows to have more problematic gender representations than live action shows. Future research could look into how gender representation is among non-animated Netflix Originals.
What is more, only one episode was coded from each show. Though it is thought that a general impression of the shows has been made, it might be possible that certain characters behaved differently in other episodes. If more episodes were coded, possibly more information about the characters would have been provided.
27
Conclusion and implications
To answer the main research question and the question posed in the title, how is gender represented in animated Netflix Originals, and specifically, are female characters taking the lead, it can be said that the findings have shown several surprising differences compared to previous research. The shows in “girls take the lead” overall appear less gender stereotypical than what was found in previous findings, and in the other shows. That is, there are about equal numbers of female and male characters, and several stereotypical masculine characteristics are equally distributed among gender. However, the absence of these attributes especially for female characters also means that there are not necessarily many female characters to look up to with regards to these attributes. For example, to say that girls are taking the lead is an exaggeration, as these shows do not particularly show more girls taking the lead. In addition, female characters continue to be portrayed as more beautiful and thinner, placing a focus on their appearance, possibly rather than on other characteristics. Concerning occupational role models, “girls take the lead” shows were not found to be aspiring to girls. Finally, the use of colour was found as something that remains very stereotypical, both for female as for male characters. Thus, though some stereotypical portrayals might not have been present, others remain present.
One of the notable absences of the Netflix Original shows was the absence of transgender characters. All characters could be identified as male or female, none as transgender. Besides boys and girls wanting and needing to see characters they can identify with and look up to, this holds true for transgender children as well. This is something for producers to become aware of.
A very important point that should be underlined is that regardless of whether “girls take the lead” shows are improving, the question is how much of a difference this is going to make in society, as most boys will not see these shows. As long as the representation of gender remains stereotypical in shows that boys watch, half of the population will continue to see these media 28 messages. They will not be encouraged to change their opinions and attitudes towards girls. This means that there remain possibilities to improve. If producers were to pay attention to the messages they convey to children and create characters that do not adhere to stereotypical gender norms, parents could let all their children watch shows in which all genders, and specifically girls would actually take the lead.
29
References Ahmed, S., & Wahab, J. A. (2014). Animation and socialization process: Gender role portrayal
on cartoon network. Asian Social Science, 10(3), 44-53.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n3p44
Anschutz, D. J., Engels, R. C., & Van Strien, T. (2012). Increased body satisfaction after
exposure to thin ideal children's television in young girls showing thin ideal
internalisation. Psychology & Health, 27(5), 603-617.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613470
Aubrey, J. S., & Frisby, C. M. (2011). Sexual objectification in music videos: A content analysis
comparing gender and genre. Mass Communication & Society, 14(4), 475–501.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2010.513468
Aubrey, J. S., & Harrison, K. (2004). The gender-role content of children's favorite television
programs and its links to their gender-related perceptions. Media Psychology, 6(2), 111–
146. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0602_1
Auster, C. J., & Mansbach, C. S. (2012). The gender marketing of toys: An analysis of color and
type of toy on the Disney store website. Sex Roles, 67(7-8), 375-388.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-012-0177-8
Bandura, A., & Bussey, K. (2004). On broadening the cognitive, motivational, and
sociostructural scope of theorizing about gender development and functioning: Comment
on Martin, Ruble, and Szkrybalo (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 130(5), 691-701.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.691
Bender, P. K, Plante, C., & Gentile, D. A. (2018). The effects of violent media content on
aggression. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 104-108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.04.003 30
Bond, B. J., & Calvers, S. L. (2014). Parasocial breakup among young children in the United
States. Journal of Children and Media, 8(4), 474-490.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2014.953559
Botta, R. A. (1999). Television images and adolescent girls’ body image disturbance. Journal of
Communication, 49(2), 22-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02791.x
Browne, B. A. (1998). Gender stereotypes in advertising on children's television in the 1990s: A
cross-national analysis. Journal of Advertising, 27(1), 83–96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1998.10673544
Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and
differentiation. Psychological Review 106(4), 676-713. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.106.4.676
Chiu, S. W., Gervan, S., Fairbrother, C., Johnson, L. L., Owen-Anderson, A. F. H., Bradley, S.
J., & Zucker, K. J. (2006). Sex-dimorphic color preference in children with gender
identity disorder: A comparison to clinical and community controls Sex Roles, 55(5-6),
385-395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9089-9
Collins, R. L. (2011). Content analysis of gender roles in media: Where are we now and where
should we go? Sex Roles, 64(3-4), 290–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9929-5
Coyne, S. M., & Archer, J. (2004). Indirect aggression in the media: A content analysis of British
television programs. Aggressive behavior, 30(3), 254-271.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20022
Coyne, S. M., Archer, J., & Eslea, M. (2004). Cruel intentions on television and in real life: Can
viewing indirect aggression increase viewers' subsequent indirect aggression? Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 88(3), 234-253.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2004.03.001 31
Coyne, S. M., Archer, J., & Eslea, M. (2006). "We're not friends anymore! unless...": The
frequency and harmfulness of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Aggressive
Behavior, 32(4), 294–307. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20126
Cunningham, S. J., & Macrae, C. N. (2011). The colour of gender stereotyping. British Journal
of Psychology, 102(3), 598-614. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02023.x
Dill, K. E., & Thill, K. P. (2007). Video game characters and the socialization of gender roles:
Young people's perceptions mirror sexist media depictions. Sex Roles, 57(11-12), 851–
864. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9278-1
Dohnt, H., & Tiggemann, M. (2006). The contribution of peer and media influences to the
development of body satisfaction and self-esteem in young girls: A prospective study.
Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 929–936. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.929
Fagot, B. I., Leinbach, M. D., Hagan, R. (1986). Gender labeling and the adoption of sex-typed
behaviors. Developmental Psychology, 22(4), 440-443. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.22.4.440
Freuh, T., & McGhee, P. E. (1975). Traditional sex role development and amount of time spent
watching television. Developmental Psychology, 11(1), 109.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076133
Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing up with
television: Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects:
Advances in theory and research (pp. 43-67) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gerding, A., & Signorielli, N. (2014). Gender roles in tween television programming: A content
analysis of two genres. Sex Roles, 70(1-2), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-
0330-z
Götz, M., Hofmann, O., Brosius, H. B., Carter, C., Chan, K., Donald, S. H., ... & Lustyik, K. 32
(2008). Gender in children’s television worldwide. TelevIZIon, 21(E), 4-9.
Hentges, B., & Case, K. (2013). Gender representations on Disney Channel, Cartoon
Network, and Nickelodeon broadcasts in the United States. Journal of Children and
Media, 7(3), 319-333. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2012.729150
Hoffner, C. (1996). Children’s wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite
television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40(3), 389-402.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159609364360
Hulbert, A. C., & Ling, Y. (2007). Biological components of sex differences in color preference.
Current Biology, 17(16), 623-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.022
Karniol, R. (2011). The color of children’s gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 65(1-2), 119-132.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9989-1
Kay, S. R., Wolkenfeld, F., & Murrill, L. M. (1988). Profiles of aggression among psychiatric
patients: I. Nature and prevalence. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 176(9), 539-
546. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-198809000-00007
Kirkpatrick, S. W., & Sanders, D. M. (1978). Body image stereotypes: A developmental
comparison. The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human
Development, 132(1), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1978.10533317
Kirsch, S, (2010). Media and youth: A developmental perspective. West Sussex, UK
Wiley-Blackwell.
Klein, H., & Shiffman, K. S. (2005). Thin is “in” and stout is “out”: What animated cartoons
tell viewers about body weight. Eating and Weight Disorders-Studies on Anorexia,
Bulimia and Obesity, 10(2), 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03327532
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and
recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30(3), 411-433. 33
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2004.tb00738.x
Lauf, E., & Scholtens, J. (2019). Mediamonitor 2019 [report]. Retrieved from
https://www.mediamonitor.nl/wp-content/uploads/Mediamonitor-2019.pdf
Leaper, C., Breed, L., Hoffman, L., & Perlman, C. A. (2002). Variations in the
gender‐stereotyped content of children's television cartoons across genres. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 32(8), 1653-1662. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2002.tb02767.x
Lemish, D. (2010). Screening gender on children’s television: The views of producers around
the world. New York: Routledge.
Long, M., Steinke, J., Applegate, B., Lapinski, M. K., Johnson, M. J., & Ghosh, S. (2010).
Portrayals of male and female scientists in television programs popular among middle
school-age children. Science Communication, 32(3), 356-382.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547009357779
Luther, C. A., & Legg, J. J. (2010). Gender differences in depictions of social and physical
aggression in children’s television cartoons in the US. Journal of Children & Media, 4(2),
191-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482791003629651
Mendes, K., & Carter, C. (2008). Feminist and gender media studies: A critical overview.
Sociology Compass, 2(6), 1701-1718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00158.x
Ofcom (2020). Children and parents: Media use and attitudes report 2019 [report]. Retrieved
from Ofcom website:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/190616/children-media-use-
attitudes-2019-report.pdf
Oppliger, P. A. (2007). Effects of gender stereotyping on socialization. In R. W. Preiss, B. M.
34
Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, & J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research: Advances
through meta-analysis (pp. 199-214), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Paik, H., & Comstock, G. (1994). The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: A
meta-analysis. Communication Research, 21(4), 516-546.
https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021004004
Pila, S., Dobrow, J., Gidney, C., & Burton, J. (2018). The “good girls”: Exploring features of
female characters in children’s animated television. Gnovis, 19(1), 1-24.
Prot, S., Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., Warburton, W., Saleem, M., Groves, C. L., &
Brown, S. (2015). Media as agents of socialization. In J. E. Grusec & P. D. Hastings
(Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (p. 276-300). Guilford Press.
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., Watson, B., & Fico, F. (2019). Analyzing media messages: Using
quantitative content analysis in research. Routledge.
Scharrer, E. (2004). Virtual violence: Gender and aggression in video game advertisements.
Mass Communication & Society, 7(4), 393–412.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0704_2
Sink, A., & Mastro, D. (2017). Depictions of gender on primetime television: A quantitative
content analysis. Mass Communication and Society, 20(1), 3-22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2016.1212243
Smith, S. L., & Cook, C. A. (2008, January). Gender stereotypes: An analysis of popular
films and TV. Paper presented at The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media
conference, Los Angeles, US. Retrieved from http://seejane.org/wp-
content/uploads/GDIGM_Gender_Stereotypes.pdf
Statista (2020). Number of Netflix paying streaming subscribers worldwide from 3rd quarter
35
2011 to 1st quarter 2020. Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/250934/quarterly-number-of-netflix-streaming-
subscribers-worldwide/
Stice, E. (2002). Risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology: A meta-analytic review.
Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 825–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.825
Tiggemann, M., & Wilson-Barrett, E. (1998). Children's figure ratings: Relationship to self-
esteem and negative stereotyping. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 23(1), 83-
88. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-108X(199801)23:1<83::AID-EAT10>3.0.CO;2-O
Thompson, T. L., & Zerbinos, E. (1995). Gender roles in animated cartoons: Has the picture
changed in 20 years? Sex Roles, 32(9-10), 651–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544217
Thompson, T. L., & Zerbinos, E. (1997). Television cartoons: Do children notice it’s a boy’s
world? Sex Roles, 37(5-6), 415-432. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025657508010
Thomsen, S. R., Weber, M. M., & Brown, L. B. (2002). The relationship between reading beauty
and fashion magazines and the use of pathogenic dieting methods among adolescent
females. Adolescence, 37(145), 1-18.
Urberg, K. A. (1982). The development of the concepts of masculinity and femininity in young
children. Sex Roles, 8(6), 659-668. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289899
Valkenburg, P. M., & Piotrowski, J. T. (2017). Plugged in: How media attract and affect youth.
Yale University Press.
Wallis, C. (2011). Performing gender: A content analysis of gender display in music videos. Sex
Roles, 64(3-4), 160-172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9814-2
“Where is Netflix available?” (n.d.). Retrieved June 2, 2020, from
https://help.netflix.com/en/node/14164
World Bank (2019). Population, female (% of total population) [graph]. Retrieved from 36
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL.FE.ZS
Wright, J. C., Huston, A. C., Truglio, R., Fitch, M., Smith, E., & Piemyat, S. (1995).
Occupational portrayals on television: Children’s’ role schemata, career aspirations, and
perceptions of reality. Child Development, 66(6), 1706-1718.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00960.x
37
Tables
38
39
Table 5: Personality attributes from "girls take the lead" shows
Construct of interest n % of n % of male χ2 p female Physical aggression 2.34 .923 None 91 93.8 71 93.4 Mild 0 0.0 1 1.3 Moderate 3 3.1 3 3.9 Severe 1 1.0 0 0.0 Extreme 2 2.1 1 1.3 Physical aggression 6 6.2 5 6.6 .00 1.000 combined Social aggression 4.85 .167 None 83 85.6 70 92.1 Mild 3 3.1 4 5.3 Moderate 0 0.0 0 0.0 Severe 7 7.2 1 1.3 Extreme 4 4.1 1 1.3 Social aggression 14 14.4 6 7.9 1.20 .273 combined Acceptance of aggression 1.49 .507 Accepted 12 63.2 6 66.7 Returned 3 15.8 0 0.0 Not accepted 4 21.1 3 33.3 Desire for 20 20.6 8 10.5 2.50 .114 action/adventure Pursuit of action/adventure 2.46 .280 Adventure 40 41.2 23 30.3 No adventure 56 57.7 52 68.4 Unwillingly 1 1.0 1 1.3 Comic role 16 16.5 16 21.1 .32 .569 Intelligence 1.95 .481 Below average 2 2.1 1 1.3 Average 88 90.7 73 96.1 Above average 7 7.2 2 2.6 Dominant 18 18.6 15 19.7 .00 .999 Taking the lead 4.37 .224 Takes the lead 27 27.8 14 18.4 Follows 5 5.2 5 6.6 Cooperates 35 36.1 23 30.3 Not applicable 30 30.9 34 44.7 Dependence .03 .987 Independent 38 39.2 30 39.5 Both 52 53.6 41 53.9 Dependent 7 7.2 5 6.6 Note: Female N = 97; male N =76.
40
Table 6: Personality attributes from the other shows
Construct of interest n % of n % of male χ2 p female Physical aggression 7.13 .129 None 128 88.9 212 79.4 Mild 3 2.1 7 2.6 Moderate 3 2.1 19 7.1 Severe 7 4.9 19 7.1 Extreme 3 2.1 10 3.7 Physical aggression 16 11.1 55 20.6 5.25 .022 combined Social aggression 3.43 .480 None 126 87.5 226 84.6 Mild 4 2.8 11 4.1 Moderate 2 1.4 1 0.4 Severe 10 6.9 27 10.1 Extreme 2 1.4 2 0.7 Social aggression 18 12.5 41 15.4 .41 .522 combined Acceptance of aggression .79 .675 Accepted 13 40.6 37 46.8 Returned 14 43.8 34 43.0 Not accepted 5 15.6 8 10.1 Desire for 24 16.7 65 24.3 2.81 .093 action/adventure Pursuit of action/adventure 6.26 .044 Adventure 45 31.3 116 43.4 No adventure 96 66.7 144 53.9 Unwillingly 3 2.1 7 2.6 Comic role 19 13.2 68 25.5 7.73 .005 Intelligence 5.01 .082 Below average 3 2.1 19 7.1 Average 131 91.0 234 87.6 Above average 10 6.9 14 5.2 Dominant 33 22.9 58 21.7 .02 .878 Taking the lead 6.43 .093 Takes the lead 41 28.5 78 29.2 Follows 7 4.9 21 7.9 Cooperates 39 27.1 92 34.5 Not applicable 57 39.6 76 28.5 Dependence 4.05 .132 Independent 62 43.1 89 33.3 Both 71 49.3 158 59.2 Dependent 11 7.6 20 7.5 Note: Female N = 144; male N = 267.
41
Appendix A: Code book
Introduction
This study “Are Girls Actually Taking the Lead? A Content Analysis of Gender Roles in
Animated Netflix Originals for Children” aims to determine how animated Netflix Original shows for children portray female and male characters.
Method
The research question will be discovered through a content analysis of animated Netflix Originals for children. Content analysis entails the systematic assignment of communication content to categories according to definitions and rules, and the analysis of relationships involving those categories.
Procedure
Below is an overview of the coding instructions and operationalisations of the variables of interest for this study. These are the variables that should be considered. The variables should only be considered for the content specific to that episode. This means that the opening or closing credits should not be coded, and that only whatever is available from that episode should be coded. In addition, any prior knowledge concerning the show should be disregarded.
Episode ID
The Episode ID list provides an overview of the episode ID that should be assigned to the content being coded, which is the episode of the shows.
42
Unit of analysis
The unit of analyses that should be coded are the different characters present during the episode.
Character ID
Characters should be coded starting from 001 and continue with increments of one (i.e. 001, 002,
003).
Character type
There are three types of characters that are taken into consideration during coding: main, minor, and background characters. It should be indicated to what category the character belongs.
1. Main characters: characters that reoccur and are regulars on the show, and they are
important to the storyline of the episode
2. Minor characters: characters that play a supporting role and appear infrequently,
semiregular, or they appear one time, but are central to the storyline of that episode
3. Background characters: characters that have at least two lines but are likely to not be
expected in other episodes
Gender
The gender of the character should be reported. Several indicators of gender that can be considered include clothes, name, and voice.
1. Female (e.g. skirts and dresses, higher voice, female name)
2. Male (e.g. pants, lower voice, male name)
3. Transgender (i.e. mention of being transgender)
4. Cannot code 43
Occupation
Occupation entails the job of the character, or their daily activities, such as being a student or a homemaker. This can be determined from conversations or thoughts about occupation, from the environment the character is in, or from activities the character performs.
1. Position of no power/prestige (e.g. student, homemaker, intern, waitress)
2. Traditional/average job (e.g. teacher, labourer, policeman)
3. Position of power/prestige (e.g. manager, boss, doctor, sergeant)
4. Not visible (cannot code)
Colours
This includes the overall description of the colours assigned to the character. If multiple colours stand out and they are both masculine and feminine, code for “both equally present”. The colours could be recognised in the characters’ hair, their dress, their eyes, or in their skin tone if they are non-human.
1. Feminine colours (e.g. pastel and/or reddish/purple/pink toned, warm colours)
2. Masculine colours (e.g. bold and/or blue/green toned, cold colours)
3. Both equally present
Humanity
Determine whether the character is or resembles a human being or is another type of character.
1. Human(oid)
2. Animal
3. Machine/robot
4. Other 44
Focus on own appearance
Determine if the character focuses on their own appearance. This could be seen from making comments about their own physical appearance or behaving in a way that shows their concern with appearance, such as looking in mirrors.
1. Focus on own appearance
2. No focus on own appearance
Focus on appearance of others
Determine if the character focuses on the appearance of others. This could be seen from making comments about the physical appearance of others (to others).
1. Focus on appearance of others
2. No focus on appearance of others
Appearance
Determine whether the character is portrayed as of average appearance, as below average appearance or above average appearance. The default option is average.
1. Below average (e.g. spots, messy hair, dirty, opposite of beauty ideals like large nose)
2. Average
3. Above average (e.g. beautiful, shiny hair; accentuated beauty features like full lips or long
eyelashes, notable presence, additional make-up)
Body size
Select one of the following for the body size of the character. The default option is average.
1. Thin (supposed to be obviously underweight, thin or skinny, e.g. very small waist) 45
2. Average
3. Heavy (supposed to be obviously overweight, obese or fat, e.g. very large waist)
Physical aggression
Note to what extent the character displays physical aggression: a violent action with the purpose of causing pain, bodily harm, or death to another. If multiple instances of physical aggression are present, the highest score should be selected.
0. None: No physical aggression
1. Mild: Makes menacing gestures, swings at people, grabs at clothing
2. Moderate: Strikes, kicks, pushes, scratches, pulls hair of others (without injury)
3. Severe: Attacks others, causing mild injury (bruises, sprain, welts, etc.)
4. Extreme: Attacks others, causing serious injury (fracture, loss of teeth, deep cuts, loss of
consciousness, etc.)
Social aggression
Note whether the character displays social aggression: indirect aggression including harmful verbal expressions or gestures pointed towards others, with the intent of damaging another person’s self-esteem, social status, or both. If multiple instances of social aggression are present, the highest score should be selected.
0. No social aggression
1. Mild: Negative facial expressions (e.g. rolling eyes, giving dirty looks) or body
movements (e.g. hand gestures), shouting at others, mimicking
2. Moderate: Writing nasty notes to others, ignoring someone
46
3. Severe: Leaving someone out on purpose, gossiping about others, spreading rumours,
verbal threat of isolation (e.g. threatening to stop being friends or remove someone from
the friend group), verbal name calling/insulting/making fun of someone (directly or in
earshot of the victim)
4. Extreme: trying to get others to exclude a group member, blackmailing
Acceptance of aggression
Determine if the character’s physical or social aggression is accepted or tolerated by others. In case one or more character(s) act(s) in response, select 2 or 3.
1. The character’s aggression is accepted or tolerated by others (i.e. others do nothing in
response)
2. The character’s aggression is returned by another character with aggression (e.g. the other
character hits back or insults the character)
3. The character’s aggression is not accepted or tolerated (i.e. the character is reprimanded
by another character)
4. Cannot code (i.e. if no physical or social aggression was displayed by the character)
Desire for action and adventure
Determine whether the character shows a desire for action and adventure. This can include suggesting an adventure, wanting to go on an adventure, and/or being excited to go on an adventure. Action and adventure include those activities that divert from normal, everyday activities.
1. Desire for action and adventure
2. No desire for action and adventure 47
Pursuit of action and adventure
Note if the character goes on an adventure or not, and if this is willingly or not.
1. Character goes on an adventure
2. Character does not go on an adventure
3. Character goes on an adventure unwillingly
Comic role
Determine whether the character portrays a comic role, i.e. if the character shows silly/amusing behaviour, including talking funny, doing funny things, or making jokes. This can also be determined from other characters laughing at the character.
1. Comic role
2. No comic role
Intelligence
Determine whether the character shows signs of (below/above average) intelligence.
1. Below average (e.g. no knowledge of basic things, making stupid decisions, acting stupid,
being noted on lack of intelligence)
2. Average
3. Above average (e.g. coming up with clever solutions to problems, having a lot of
knowledge on certain topics, being noted on intelligence)
Dominance
Determine whether the character is seen as most important, powerful, or influential in interactions, if the character is in control of, or has more power over others, such as making 48 decisions for others. In case the character shows a dominant attitude/behaviour once, select dominant.
1. Dominant
2. Not dominant
Taking the lead
Determine whether the character takes the lead, follows along, or cooperates compared to the other characters. The way to determine which one to choose is as follows: in case the character takes the lead once throughout the episode, select option 1. Choose 2 in case the character shows no sign of initiative, and rather than cooperation shows submissiveness to the other character(s) involved. In case the character is on an equal level to the others, and (s)he cooperates, select 3.
Select 4 in case there is no instance in the episode in which the lead can be taken by the character
(e.g. if the character is not involved, or the character has minimal screen time).
1. Takes the lead
2. Follows
3. Cooperates
4. Not applicable
Dependence
Determine if the character is independent or dependent on others. Independence can be being able to achieve a goal by oneself and not being controlled by someone else. Dependence can be being reliant on others to achieve something or being controlled by someone else. If the character shows both dependence and independence, select 2.
1. Independent 49
2. Both independent and dependent
3. Dependent
50
Appendix B: Coding sheet
Episode ID:
Character ID
Character type Main Minor Background character character character
Gender Female Male Transgender Cannot code
Occupation No position Traditional/ Position of Cannot code of power average job power
Colours Feminine Masculine Both equally colours colours present
Humanity Human Animal Robot/ Other Machine
Focus on own Yes No appearance
Focus on Yes No appearance of others
Appearance Below Average Above average average
Body size Thin Average Heavy
Physical None Mild Moderate Severe Extreme aggression
51
Social None Mild Moderate Severe Extreme aggression
Acceptance of Accepted Returned Not accepted Cannot code aggression
Desire for action Desire No desire and adventure
Pursuit of action Adventure No adventure Unwillingly and adventure adventure
Comic role Comic role No comic role
Intelligence Below Average Above average average
Dominance Dominant Not dominant
Taking the lead Takes the Follows Cooperates Not lead applicable
Dependence Independent Both Dependent
52
Appendix C: Netflix Originals episodes overview
This is an overview of the shows and their corresponding episode titles that have been analysed for this content analyses. The episodes that include an asterisk belong to the “girls take the lead” category.
E01: Green Eggs and Ham - Car
E02: The Epic Tales of Captain Underpants - Captain Underpants and the Dreadful Debacle of
DJ Drowsy Drawers
E03*: The Magic School Bus Rides again - Pigs in the Wind
E04*: SpyKids: Mission Critical - School Dazed
E05: The Boss Baby: Back in Business - Cat’s in the Cradle
E06: The Last Kids on Earth - Mall Quest
E07*: Spirit Riding Free - Lucky and the Treacherous Trail
E08: Robozuna - Game Changer Part Two
E09*: True and the Rainbow Kingdom - Frookie Sitting
E10*: Lego Elves: The Secrets of Elvendale - The Goblin King
E11: Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Tarzan and Jane - Tarzan Meet Jane
E12*: Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts - Explosion Berries
E13: Kulipari: An Army of Frogs - Episode 2
E14: Ever After High - Welcome to Ever After
E15: Dinotrux - Scrapadactyls
E16: All Hail King Julien - Poll Position
E17: Legend Quest - Jersey Devil 53
E18*: Lego Friends: The Power of Friendship - Slam Dunk
E19: Dawn of the Croods - School of Hard Rocks
E20: The Hollow - The Desert
E21*: World of Winx - New Powers
E22: Voltron: Legendary Defender - Some Assembly Required
E23: Kong: King of the Apes - Snake in the Grass
E24: Skylander Academy - My Way or the Sky Way
E25: The Dragon Prince - What is Done
E26: Stretch Armstrong and the Flex Fighters - Pulled in Every Direction
E27: Glitch Techs - Tutorial Mode
E28: The Adventures of Puss in Boots - Sphinx
E29: Fast & Furious: Spy Racers - Enter SH1FT3R
E30: Dragons: Race to the Edge - Eye of the Beholder, Part 2
E31*: She-ra and the Princesses of Power - The Sword Part 2
E32*: 3Below: Tales of Arcadia - Terra Incognita Part Two
E33: Lego Bionicle: The Journey to One - Quest for Unity
E34: Trollhunters: Tales of Arcadia - Becoming: Part 2
E35*: Carmen Sandiego - Becoming Carmen Sandiego: Part II
E36: Justin Time Go - Super Speed Jet/ The Count’s Creepy Critters
E37: Care Bears and Cousins - Return to Sender
E38: Turbo FAST - Dungball Derby/Ace of Race
E39*: Luna Petunia - The Fuzzlings/ Now We’re Cooking
E40: Chip and Patato - Chip Gets Lost/ Car Wash Chip
E41: Llama Llama - Last Day of Summer/ Bully Goat 54
E42: Popples - It Doesn’t Take a Genius/ Palentine’s Day
E43: VeggieTales in the House - Bob & the Awesome Frosting Mustache/ Bob & Larry: Gettin’
Angry
E44*: Harvey Girls Forever! - While You Weren’t Sleeping/ The Secret Strife of Pets
E45: Charlie’s Colorforms City - Rock Star Charlie/ Birthday Charlie
E46*: Glitter Force - Kelsey Gets a Makeover
E47: Treehouse Detectives - The Case of the Collapsing Castle/ The Case of the Hurt Bird
E48*: Trolls: The Beat Goes On! - Two Party System/ Fun Branch
E49: We’re Lalaloopsy - Spot’s Good Hair Day/ Jewel Bakes a Cake
E50: Dragons: Rescue Riders - Deep Trouble
E51*: H20 Mermaid Adventure - Caught in the Net
E52*: Little Witch Academia - Papiliodia
E53: Super Monsters - Borrowed Trouble/ Spell help
E54: Kazoops! - Tiny Little me/ Cosmic Clean-up/ Clothes for Jimmy
E55: Puffin Rock - The Shiny Shell/ Friendly Finn/ A Feather Bed
E56: Archibald’s Next Big Thing - Best in Showbot/ The Secret of Madame Baroness
E57*: Hilda - Chapter Two: The Midnight Giant
E58: Cupcake and Dino: General Services - Cupcake Days/ My Brother, My Headband
E59: Home: Adventures with Tip & Oh - Little Kisses/ Snow Day
E60: Buddy Thunderstruck - To Protect and Swerve/ Robo-Truck of the Future
E61: The Mr. Peabody & Sherman Show - Stuck/ Mozart
55
Appendix D: Intercoder reliability
Table 1: Intercoder reliability values for all variables
Variable Reliability
Demographic attributes Gender 1.00
Importance of character .87 Occupation .96 Humanity 1.00 Physical character attributes Colour 1.00 Focus on own appearance .81
Focus on appearance of others 1.00 Appearance of the character .72 Body size .97 Aggression Physical aggression .87 Social aggression .89
Acceptance of aggression .671 Adventure Desire of action and adventure .85 Pursuit of action and adventure .72 Masculine stereotypes
Comic role .642 Intelligence .83
Dominance .773 Lead .84
56
Dependence 1.004
Notes:
1. The intercoder reliability value of “acceptance of aggression” is just acceptable.
Adjustments were made by adding more examples to the code book for a clearer
understanding of when to code what.
2. The intercoder reliability value for “comic role” was just below the acceptable value.
However, as the variable seemed interesting to the research, the variable description was
adjusted in the code book for a clearer overview of the codes.
3. For the variable “dominance” the intercoder reliability value was at first below acceptable
level (.52). The value was increased after the missing values were resolved.
4. This variable showed a perfect intercoder reliability score. However, it should be noted
that afterwards the variable was adjusted to create a more nuanced variable.
57