Does calling a role 'chef' or 'chef/female chef' change whether a teenager imagines themselves in that job? Swiss and Norwegian researchers asked this question by studying French-speaking adolescents, since French assigns grammatical gender to nouns in ways that can reinforce stereotypes.
The team ran two experiments where teens evaluated occupations presented in either traditional masculine form or as gender-inclusive pairs. They measured whether teens saw these jobs as warm and competent, and whether they felt they'd belong in them.
Gender stereotypes matter more than how you say the job title
The results defied what earlier adult studies had shown. When researchers used gender-inclusive language—pairing traditionally masculine and feminine forms—it didn't automatically make teens more open to careers outside their gender stereotype. Instead, the job's existing reputation was the real driver. For example, if nursing is already seen as feminine in a teen's mind, rewording the job title barely shifted that perception.
Girls and boys responded differently, and age played a role
The effect varied significantly by gender and age. Girls were especially influenced by how stereotypical a job already was; boys showed different patterns. Older teens didn't respond the same way as younger ones. This suggests that by the teen years, gender stereotypes about careers are already fairly entrenched, and simply changing how we name a job isn't enough to reshape those beliefs.
Language alone won't overpower deep-rooted career stereotypes
This study involved French-speaking adolescents in Europe, so findings may not directly apply to Singapore's different cultural context and language structure. However, the core insight—that job titles alone have limited power to shift career choices—suggests a wider truth: if we want teens to explore careers beyond traditional gender lines, rewording job descriptions is a start, but addressing the underlying stereotypes matters far more.