The Cinderella Complex: Word embeddings reveal gender stereotypes in movies and books.

Our analysis of thousands of movies and books reveals how these cultural products weave stereotypical gender roles into morality tales and perpetuate gender inequality through storytelling. Using the word embedding techniques, we reveal the constructed emotional dependency of female characters on male characters in stories. We call this narrative structure "Cinderella complex", which assumes that women depend on men in the pursuit of a happy, fulfilling life. Our analysis covers a substantial portion of narratives that shape the modern collective memory, including 7,226 books, 6,087 movie synopses, and 1,109 movie scripts. The "Cinderella complex" is observed to exist widely across periods and contexts, reminding how gender stereotypes are deeply rooted in our society. Our analysis of the words surrounding female and male characters shows that the lives of males are adventure-oriented, whereas the lives of females are romantic-relationship oriented. Finally, we demonstrate the social endorsement of gender stereotypes by showing that gender-stereotypical movies are voted more frequently and rated higher.

Introduction

Throughout history, stories served not only to entertain but also to instruct. The functions of stories determine their shapes and fates. Among all collectively created stories, including movies, plays, and books, no matter what form they took, those of morals complying with the existing values were more likely to survive. Stories are similar to species in many ways, and the social process for communicating and remembering these mind creatures works as fitness functions to evolve their shapes [1-4]. This process is in favor of stories that reduce the complexity of social lives into memorable and stereotypical descriptions, as these stories are resilient to fast-decaying social attention [5-8]. Dramatic shapes with ups and downs, flat characters, oversimplified causes, all these elements will make a story easier to retell and relate and even become culture memes [3,9]. However, these elements also enhance the spreading of stereotypes broad and far across cultures and periods through storytelling.

Kurt Vonnegut is among the earliest scholars who proposed to study the shape of stories [10]. Reagan et al. quantified the shape of stories using dictionary-based sentiment analysis. They created a sentiment score dictionary for words, which allowed them to calculate the average scores of sentences that show the ups and downs of stories. [11]. However, their analysis relies on human coders to label the sentiment of words; therefore, it is costly to scale up. We suggest that the emerging word embedding techniques [12,13] provide new tools to automate sentiment labeling and scale up the analysis of stories. Although word embeddings have been used to explore social and cultural dimensions in large-scale corpora [14-16], to our limited knowledge, we firstly apply them to analyze the shape of stories and quantify gender stereotypes.

We firstly construct a vector representing the dimension of happy versus unhappy from pre-trained word vectors using Google News data [17]. The distance from this vector to other word vectors represents the “happiness score” of the corresponding words. The average of “happiness scores” over the timeline of stories quantifies their shape. Moreover, by controlling the window size to analyze only the words surrounding specific names, we can track the “happiness scores” of different characters. Using these techniques, we find that in the movie synopsis of Cinderella, the happiness of Ella (Cinderella) depends on Kit (Prince) but not vice versa. This finding supports the “Cinderella complex” [18], a narrative structure enhancing the stereotypical incompetence of women. Applying our analysis to 6,087 movie synopses, 1,109 movie scripts, and 7,226 books, we observe the vast existence of this narrative structure. Our review of the words surrounding characters unpack their stereotypical life packages; the lives of males are adventure-oriented, whereas the lives of females are romantic-relationship oriented. Finally, we reveal the social endorsement of gender stereotypes by identifying the association between the strength of gender stereotypes in movie synopses and the IMDB ratings to the analyzed movies.

Gender stereotypes: Women’s lacking of competence and agency

According to the research of social psychology, gender stereotypes are inaccurate, biased, or stereotypical generalizations about different gender roles [19]. It is associated with limited cognitive resources and people’s tendency to overstate the differences between groups yet underestimate the variance within groups [19]. The gender roles originate from labor division historically [20] and diffuse into many other social dimensions [21], including education, occupation, and income [21,22]. One significant consequence of gender stereotypes is the reinforcement of gender inequality through parenting styles and conventions in school and workplace [23,24].

As one of the most pervasive stereotypes, gender stereotypes reflect the general expectations about the social roles of males and females. For example, females are communal, kind, family-oriented, warm, and sociable, whereas men should be agentic, skilled, work-oriented, competent, and assertive [19,25]. Many scholars argued that agency versus communion is the primary dimension to study [26,27], while some others emphasized competence instead of agency [28]. Cuddy et al. found that agency and competence tend to be correlated [28].

The rich literature on gender stereotypes points out the assumptions to explore in identifying and quantifying stereotypical narrative structures, including 1) The emotional dependency of females on males. Men and women have different social imagines. Men are agentic, and women are communal [19,29,30]; men are active, whereas women are passive; men give, and women take in relationships [29-31]. These biased images of men and women lead to biased expectations in their relationships. Those who consider women less competent would tend to believe that they are fragile and sensitive and need to be protected by men [19,32]. Following this literature, we propose to test the emotional dependency of females on males [33]; 2) Men act and women appear. The English novelist John Berger [34] used this quote to describe the male-female dichotomy. Considering the stereotypical role and traits of men, one would imagine men are more likely than women to be described using verbs; 3) Social endorsement of gender stereotypes. The social and cultural roots of gender stereotypes form social force against stereotype disconfirmation from people, action, or ideas [19]. In this sense, the stories that approve gender stereotypes will gain social approval themselves, whereas the stories against stereotypes will be ignored and disapproved. Our study will test this assumption by connecting the frame of stories with their social acceptance.

While existing literature primarily focuses on stereotype reinforcement through people and actions [19], Colette Dowling’s analysis reveals stereotypes in ideas and narratives. The term Cinderella complex first appeared in Colette Dowling’s book The Cinderella Complex: Women's Hidden Fear of Independence. It describes women's fear of independence and an unconscious desire to be taken care of by others [18]. For example, in the story Cinderella, Ella is kind-hearted, beautiful, attractive, and independent, yet cannot decide her own life and has to rely on the support from others (e.g., the fairy godmother), especially the male characters (e.g., Kit the Prince). Dowlings argued that the story of Cinderella amplified the psychological and physical differences between women and men and implied that women depend on men in the pursuit of a happy, fulfilling life. In this paper, we present evidence supporting Dowling’s arguments on the emotional dependency of females on males in our analysis of the movie synopsis of Cinderella. We also examine the other two assumptions on stereotypical narrative structures using machine-enhanced analysis of large corpora.

Results

1. The Cinderella complex: Men are women’s ways to happiness

We select the text of Cinderella from the movie synopsis data, which contains 97 sentences. Within each sentence, we calculate the distance from the pre-trained vectors of words [17] to the constructed happiness vector to derive the happiness scores of words. The emotional status of characters is built up by a sequence of events; therefore, we sum the scores across sentences alongside the story timeline to measure the cumulative average rather than the marginal variance of emotion. For example, the lowest point of the emotional curve of Cinderella (at around 30 percentile of the story timeline in Fig 1B) is the consequence of the death of parents and maltreatment from the stepmother. Therefore, the emotional status of Cinderella at this stage is better measured by the cumulative score rather than the score of any single sentence.

Fig 1

The Cinderella complex.

a, Visualizing the sentiment landscape of the movie synopsis of Cinderella as a skyline (a black outline is added to enhance the “skyline”metaphor visually). We show sentences in a vertical schema, colored by their “happiness score”—green for happy and red for unhappy and the transparency represents the scale of the scores. Filled squares (orange for Ella and blue for Kit) indicate the co-occurrence of Ella (Cinderella) and Kit (the Prince) in the same sentence. Hollow squares indicate where only one character appears: b, The happiness curves of Ella (orange) and Kit (blue). The grey dotted lines marks the sentences in which they co-occur, corresponding to the filled squares in Panel a. We fit the increase or decrease in happiness scores across successive co-occurrences with OLS regression (see Methods for more information). Thick lines show the estimates of regression.

The story begins with a happy life of Ella with both parents. The death of her mother is associated with the first drop of the emotion curve (around five percentiles on the x-axis in Fig 1B). The reorganization of the family and the death of her father on a business trip make her life bumpy. Under the maltreatment of the stepmother, Ella’s life goes all the way down to the bottom (30 percentiles), but this is also when the twist happens—Ella meets Kit in the forest. After the upsetting separation, joining the royal ball party and dancing with Kit with the help from the fairy godmother makes the emotion curve peak (65 percentiles). Leaving the party and losing the crystal shoes pull the curve down again, but the reunion with Kit pushes the curve back (90 percentiles).

In contrast, the emotion curve of Kit is less bumpy, especially at the scenarios he interacts with Ella, i.e., the sentences that contain both names. In other words, the happiness of Ella is driven by Kit, whereas the happiness of Kit is relatively less elastic to their interaction. These findings present evidence for Dowling’s analysis on “Cinderella complex”, the dependency of females on males in the pursuit of a happy life [18].

The naturally following question is, how general is this pattern? Is it as Dowling predicted—existing widely across periods and contexts? We select ten movies across genres, lengths, periods, and the gender of the leading characters (defined by the most frequently observed name in the text). We find the asymmetric emotional dependency of females on males across these ten movies—Cinderella is not the only character who has complicated feelings on males (Fig 2, books see Fig 3).

Fig 2

The Cinderella complex across ten movie synopses.

a-e, The happiness curves for five movie synopses in which the leading character is female. We define happiness curves in the same way as in Fig 1B. f-j, The increase in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender, measured in the average of positive regression coefficients k, are shown as bars (blue for males and orange for females). The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. k-o, The happiness curves for five movie synopses in which the leading character is male. Panels designed in the same schema as a-e. p-t, The increase in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender. Panels designed in the same schema as f-j.

Fig 3

The Cinderella complex across ten books.

The code is available on https://github.com/wenoptics/viz-of-gender-stereotypes-from-texts/.

We further examine this pattern across 7,226 books, 6,087 movie synopsis, and 1,109 movie scripts. We find that despite the association between females and emotional words (see S1 Fig for this association), when male and female characters are present in the same context (which is a set of sequential sentences, see the definition in Method), the happiness score of female characters is significantly higher than that in the contexts without the presence of male characters (S2 Fig). Meanwhile, within the context of character occurrence, the increase in the happiness score is higher for female characters than for male characters (Fig 4). These findings reveal a constructed, asymmetrical emotional dependency of females on males, robust against the publication time (S7 Fig) and genres (S8 Fig) of stories and the direction of emotion (S3 Fig).

Fig 4

The Increase in happiness, conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender, is higher for female than for male characters.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). The increase in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender, measured in the average of positive regression coefficients k, are shown as bars (blue for males and orange for females). The result of decrease in happiness is shown in S3 Fig. The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

2. Men act and women appear: A life unpacked

To unfold the constructed contexts justifying the emotional dependency of female characters on male characters, we analyze the words surrounding the names of characters. Within each of the 6,087 movie synopses, we select five words before and five words after the names of the leading characters across all the sentences. We iterate over the pairwise combinations of words within 10-word samples across all movie synopses to construct word co-occurrence networks, one for females and the other for males (Figs 5 and 6). We then identify communities from these two networks using the Q-modularity algorithms [35]. Four communities emerge from both networks, including action, family, career, and romance in the female network and action, family, career, and crime in the male network (Fig 5). This community structure reveals romantic-relationships define females characters, while adventures and excitements build males characters.

Fig 5

Word co-occurrence networks describing the life packages of female vs. male as leading characters.

For each of the 6,087 movie synopses under study, we select ten words surrounding the names of the leading characters (five words before and five words after) across all the sentences containing the names. We iterate over the pairwise combinations of words within each 10-word sample across all movie synopses to construct word co-occurrence networks, one for males and the other for females. The female network (a) has 39,284 nodes (words), and 921,208 links (pairwise combinations of words within samples) and the male network (b) has 46,909 nodes and 1,319,208 links. We detect communities from the networks using the modularity algorithm [35]. Top four communities emerge from both networks, including action, family, career, and romance in the female network and action, family, career, and crime in the male network. Only nodes of 1,500 or more links are labeled.

Fig 6

The distribution of adjectives, verbs, and nouns in female and male word co-occurrence networks.

a-c. The distribution of adjectives (a, green labels), verbs (b, blue labels), and nouns (c, red labels) in the female word co-occurrence network as introduced in Fig 5A. d-f. The distribution of adjectives (a, green labels), verbs (b, blue labels), and nouns (c, red labels) in the male word co-occurrence network as introduced in Fig 5B. Word categories are detected using the Penn Treebank tagset [36]. Only nodes of 1,500 or more links are labeled.

We further cut both networks into three slices by word categories, including adjectives, verbs, and nouns. The differences in the distribution of words portray stereotypical gender images in detail. For example, both females and males may be described as “young”, but females are more likely to be “beautiful”, and males are more likely to be “able”. Further, we observed that male characters are more likely than female characters to be described using verbs across three datasets (Fig 7). This observation reminds the quote, “Men act, and women appear” from the English novelist John Berger [34]. He used this quote to summarize the stereotypical ideas that men are defined by their actions, whereas women are defined by their appearances. Aside from analyzing all the words describing the male and female characters (Figs 5–7), we also select and analyze the words within the context of the presence of both genders. The observed difference between groups in Figs 5–7 remains significant (see S4–S6 Figs for more information). In sum, our analysis reveals the stereotypical male-female dichotomy that females are communal, kind, family-oriented, warm, and sociable, whereas men should be agentic, skilled, work-oriented, competent, and assertive [19,25].

Fig 7

Men are more likely than women to be described using verbs.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). For each movie synopsis, movie script, or book under study, we select ten words surrounding the names of the leading characters (five words before and five words after) across all the sentences containing the names. We detect word categories using the Penn Treebank tagset [36] and calculate the probability of observing verbs, P(verb), across all 10-word samples for females or males within each dataset. The bars show the values of P(verb), blue for males and orange for females. The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

3. The Cinderella complex: People’s choice

We assume that there is a hidden culture market that suppresses stereotype disconfirmation from people, action, or ideas [3,19,37] and approves stereotype reproduction from all these directions. We explore how the strength of Cinderella complex in narratives, measured by the level of emotional dependency of females on males, is associated with the acceptance of narratives. We use the averaged ratings to movies, which vary from 0 to 10, as a proxy of movie reputation. The number of votes, defined as the number of audiences who rate the movie, measures movie popularity. These two variables characterize the cultural market shaped by social choices.

We observed that the increase in female happiness conditioning on co-occurring with male characters has a positive impact on both the ratings and popularity of movies (Table 1). In contrast, the increase in male happiness has a negative influence on movie acceptance. In other words, narratives presenting the emotional dependency and vulnerability of females are perceived as “good stories”, but movies highlighting the emotional vulnerability of males are not as much welcomed. These results are robust to story intensity (the number of sentences with the co-occurrence of female and male characters) and the gender of the leading character (Table A and Table B in S1 File). For independent variables, the leading gender means the gender of the main character who dominantly shows up in the movie script, where the male is 1 and female is 0. N of co-occurrence implies the number of sentences that the characters of both genders appear in the same sentence. We found that story intensity (the number of sentences with the co-occurrence of female and male characters) and story with male leading character also have a positive impact on both the ratings and popularity of movies.

Table 1

OLS regressions predicting the number of votes and rating in the movie synopses dataset.

	Rating	N of Votes
Constant	6.12***	8.11***
The gender of the leading character(male = 1, female = 0)	0.18***	0.38***
N of sentences with the co-occurrence of female and male characters	0.01*	0.02***
Increase in happiness for female characters	0.06**	0.09*
Increase in happiness for male characters	-0.08***	-0.29***
R-squared	0.016	0.048
F-statistic	13.03	40.10
N of cases	6,087	6,087

Note. Asterisks indict P values.

* P ≤ 0.05

**P ≤ 0.01, and

*** P ≤ 0.001.

Conclusions and discussions

After three waves of feminism [38], words like brave and independent are more likely to associate with female roles [39]. Females’ increasing entry into professional occupations enhances their perceived competence, and the improvement of their education level also helps break the gender stereotypes [25]. In a recent study, Gard et al. analyzed gender stereotypes in the past century using word embeddings and found that gender bias was decreasing, especially after the second-wave feminism in the 1960s [15]. The meta-analysis based on 16 U.S. public opinion polls (1946–2018) showed that social expectation on the competence and intelligence of females increased over time, but the expectation on the agency of females remained low [26]. This observation is consistent with our analysis of the passive and agency-lacking female characters.

Our study, while primarily focuses on designing and testing existing assumptions on gender stereotypes, also aims to contribute to the theories on gender stereotypes in several dimensions. 1) Interacting vs. separated gender roles. The analysis of the relationships between genders is critical to reveal stereotypical expectations, as gender roles emerge from the interactions with the other gender. 2) Visible vs. hidden stereotypes. Some gender inequalities and stereotypes are more noticeable than others, such as inequalities in voting rights, working salaries, and educational opportunities. These apparent inequalities may distract social attention and make hidden stereotypes in paradigms, language, and communication even less noticeable [30]. 3) Social reproduction of stereotypes. There are both causes and consequences of stereotypical narratives. Stereotypes reduce the complexity of stories and make them more relatable and memorable; however, the flat characters may project into reality. Gender stereotypes, constructed and weaved into the moral tales from movies and books, may maintain gender inequality though these morality norms and reproduce gender inequality as a social fact [23]. For example, when children are exposed to stereotyped narratives, they may fill themselves into stereotypical roles [40]. A study on the impact of Disney movies shows that children who associate beauty to popularity for movie characters tend to apply the same principle in real lives [41].

The limitations of the current study are noted and should be aware of in future research designs. The natural language processing models used to identify the leading characters their gender (www.nltk.org/book/ch02.html) may miss the uncommon names of characters or misidentify characters genders. Also, there is an unexplained variance between machine-labeled versus human-labeled happiness scores for words (Pearson correlation coefficient equals 0.53 with a P-value < 0.001). In general, sentiment scores for words have limitations in analyzing narratives as a fixed score, since they can not capture the variance of sentiments of the same word across contexts.

Methods

Data collection

We collect three datasets for this present research, including movie synopses, movie scripts, and books (Fig 8). We collect the movie synopsis data from the IMDB website (www.imdb.com). We select the movies with user ratings, plot synopsis, release year, and genre. And we get 16,255 movies for further data filtering. We choose 6,087 movie synopses with more than five sentences and both female and male characters in the analysis. Second, we also collect the movie script data from the IMSDB website (www.imsdb.com), which is the largest database of online movie scripts. There are 1,109 movie scripts after filtering out those in which only one gender of characters are identified. The metadata of the movie scripts, such as the release year and genre, is also collected. Third, in addition to the two movie datasets, we also collect the data of more than 40 thousand English books from the Gutenberg Project (www.gutenberg.org), including the text of story, publication time, and genre. In the data filtering of books, only 7,226 books belonging to the genre "language and literature" and containing both female and male characters are selected. All the code and data are available from https://github.com/xuhuimin2017/storyshape/.

Fig 8

Data collection and cleaning.

a, Pre-trained 300-dimension word embeddings using Google News [17]. b, We select two sets of words, one for positive sentiment and the other for negative sentiment. We then subtract the average vector of the negative words from the average vector of the positive words to obtain the “happiness vector” [14]. c, The constructed happiness vector is verified using a human-labeled dataset. We select 10,000 words from the Hedonometer project (http://hedonometer.org/words.html), each of which was assigned a happiness score ranging from one to nine by Amazon’s Mechanical Turk workers [42]. The distance from the Google News vectors of these 10,000 words to our “happiness vector” is positively correlated with their manually assigned happiness score. The Pearson correlation coefficient equals 0.53 (P-value <0.001). d, We calculate the happiness score of each word in the analyzed text by measuring the cosine distance from their Google News vectors to the constructed happiness vector. e-f, Three datasets in this study, including 6,087 movie synopses, 1,109 movie scripts, and 7,226 books. g, For each dataset, the leading characters and their gender are identified to track their emotional fluctuation. h, Word co-occurrence networks are constructed to describe the life packages of female vs. male as leading characters. These networks contain words surrounding the names of the leading characters (with a window size of ten words) as nodes and their pairwise combinations as links.

Fig 9 compares the length of stories in sentence across three datasets. Since the users of IMDB website create the movie synopses, the variance in story length is much more significant than that in movie scripts and books, as the scripts and books are typically from a smaller group of authors. Because the length of dialogues is usually short, the average number of words per sentence for the movie script data is much smaller than the other two datasets. Given the different number of sentences in three datasets, we segment movie synopses by sentences, while segment movie scripts and books by paragraphs. Since the sentence is the primary unit of narrative, this method of story segmentation helps us understand the variance of sentiment in stories.

Fig 9

Story length in sentence.

The distribution of the number of sentences of 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). d, The number of words per sentence across three datasets.

Constructing the happiness vector and calculating happiness scores

Frame analysis proposed by Goffman is widely used to analyze the structure of narrative and reveal its bias [43]. A frame is a scheme of interpretation to organize the details of events and human behaviors. It could be a set of stereotypes working as cognitive “filters” for making complex social realities easy to interpret. Framing has consistently been shown to be an influential source of social bias in decision-making [44]. Framing involves four key steps: “define problems, diagnose causes, make moral judgments, and suggest remedies” [45]. To frame the identities of social roles is a typical approach for building stereotypes around underprivileged groups so as to justify unfair social systems [46]. For example, Iyengar argues that episodic television frames tend to blame the poor themselves for poverty, compared with the thematic television news frames [47]. However, despite the importance of frame analysis in revealing the formation of social bias, its limitation is also apparent. Frame analysis originates from and is strongly influenced by rhetorical analysis, which tends to amplify all rhetorical details of narrative and may lose the focus of the massive structure. Also, frame analysis involves content analysis conducted by human coders who are trained to label the content using codebooks manually. It is costly in time and human research workforce and hard to scale up and validate.

The advances in natural language processing (NLP) techniques and availability of large scale text data unleash tremendous opportunities to automate frame analysis of stories and study gender stereotype. According to the study of Caliskan et al., the word embeddings derived from text corpora can also be used to reveal the stereotypes of stories [14]. Caliskan et al. show that the fraction of female workers within each occupation is strongly correlated with the Cosine distance from the vector representing female to the vector representing occupation [14]. Garg et al. use word embeddings trained on the text data of 100 years to capture the evolution of gender bias over time. They find that from 1910 to 1990, the measured gender bias was decreasing [15]. Using a similar method, Kozlowski et al. show that in addition to occupations, gender bias also exists widely in sports, food, music, vehicles, clothes, and names [16].

We propose to use word embedding techniques for the analysis of gender stereotypes. Word embeddings provide a better solution to analyze the sentiments of text and to deal with the high dimensional semantic relationships between words [12]. Instead of relying on human-labeled sentiment scores, the word embedding method constructs the emotion vector and calculate the emotion score for every word in the document automatically. Therefore, it is more fine-grained compared with the emotional dictionary method. The accuracy of sentiment analysis can be significantly improved using the word embedding method [12,13]. There are several publicly accessible datasets, including 300-dimension Google News vectors [13,17], 300-dimension Wikipedia and Gigaword vectors [48,49], and 200-dimension Twitter vectors [48,49].

To compare these word embeddings and choose the best word embeddings for our analysis, first, we construct a vector representing “happiness” by retrieving the pre-trained embedding vectors of two sets of words, including success, succeed, luck, fortune, happy, glad, joy, smile for positive and failure, fail, unfortunate, unhappy, sad, sorrow, tear for negative sentiment. By subtracting the average vector of the positive words from the average of the negative words, we created the “happiness” vector using these pre-trained vectors. Second, we use the happiness scores of 10,000 sentiment words provided by the Hedonometer project (http://hedonometer.org/words.html). By merging the 5,000 most frequently used words from Google Books, New York Times articles, Music Lyrics, and Tweets, Dodds et al. got these 10,000 words. Each of these words was assigned a happiness score ranging from one to nine by Amazon’s Mechanical Turk workers [42]. We get the word vectors for the 10,000 words using these pre-trained vectors and calculate the Cosine distances between each of these 10,000 words vectors and the happiness vector. We compute the Pearson correlation coefficients between the Cosine distances of these 10,000 words and their happiness scores. It turns out the Pearson coefficient calculated with Google News embeddings is the largest (0.53***), compared with the person coefficients computed with Wiki & Giga embedding (0.40***) and Twitter embedding (0.47***). Therefore, in this study, we employ the pre-trained word vectors trained on Google News dataset for our analysis.

To obtain the emotion curves of characters, we firstly get the happiness score of each word by calculating the distance from their Google News vectors to the constructed happiness vector. Then, we can obtain the happiness scores averaged for each sentence or paragraph and normalize the happiness scores within a character with Z Score method. For two characters in the same context, we assume that they share the same raw scores of happiness. To better measure the happiness score for different characters over time, the happiness score of the sentence or paragraph without the name of either female or male character is 0. In this way, we can get the happiness curve of different characters for the whole story. We finally accumulate the happiness curve across sentences or paragraphs that contain the names of either female or male character to get the overall emotion trend. Take the story of Cinderella as an example (Fig 1A), when Ella and Kit get married at the end of the story, they share the same raw happiness score estimated from the sentence. But for Ella, this score results in a more positive pull in the displayed curve than that of Kit, because Ella was upset of her stepmother before the marriage, which makes the raw happiness score from marriage translated into the higher z-score.

Identifying the leading characters and their gender

To investigate how the other gender influences the leading characters, we need to identify character names and their gender. The IMDB dataset provides the information of the main cast that includes the gender information (in the form of “actor” or “actress”), cast names, and character names. The movie script dataset contains the dialogues between characters (put the character name before the dialogue), which can also help us to identify the person names in stories. We then employ a pre-trained gender classifier (github.com/clintval/gender-predictor) to predict the gender of the character names. In the book dataset, we use the names corpus for males and females from the NLTK package (www.nltk.org/book/ch02.html) to identify name and gender together. Also, we use the neuralcoref package in Python to annotate and resolve the coreference clusters (huggingface.co/coref). To identify the leading character, we count the frequency of person names appeared in stories. For example, if the most common name is female, then it is a female-dominated story and vice versa. Finally, we measure the co-occurrence of male and female character by finding whether they appear together in the same sentence for movie synopses or in the same paragraph for movie scripts and books.

Measuring the increase and decrease in happiness during the co-occurrence

We measure the increase or decrease in happiness scores with OLS regression. First, we normalize the emotion curve to the range from 0 to 1 to compare the slopes across different characters in different stories. Then, we fit regression models to the happiness curves across successive co-occurrences between male and female characters. In this way, we can get the slopes with regression coefficients to measure the increase and decrease in happiness scores. To be specific, the increase in happiness is measured by the average of positive OLS regression coefficients and weighted by the sample size (i.e., number of sentences or paragraphs in the regression). And the decrease in happiness is measured by the average of negative OLS regression coefficients and weighted by the sample size. Also, we merge the nearby sentences or paragraphs of co-occurrences. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the different length of the gap between sentences or paragraphs of co-occurrence. After merging the sentences or paragraphs of co-occurrence in chronological order using different gap length (ranging from 1 to 10), we find that the results are robust.

The overall happiness level, is higher for female than for male characters.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). The happiness score averaged over the whole course of stories are shown as bars (orange for females and blue for males). The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

Females are happier when they encounter (co-occur in the same sentence) males.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). Bars show the happiness scores, orange for co-occurring with males and blue otherwise. The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

The decrease in happiness, conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender, is higher for female than for male characters.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). The decrease in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender, measured in the average of negative regression coefficients k, are shown as bars (blue for males and orange for females). The lines on the bottom of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

Word co-occurrence networks describing female vs. male when they meet the other gender.

For each of the 6,087 movie synopses under study, we select ten words surrounding the names of the leading characters (five words before and five words after) across all the sentences containing both names of the female and male leading characters. We iterate over the pairwise combinations of words within each 10-word sample across all movie synopses to construct word co-occurrence networks, one for males and the other for females. The female network (a) has 9,379 nodes (words), and 73695 links (pairwise combinations of words within samples) and the male network (b) has 13,776 nodes and 225,473 links. We detect communities from the networks using the modularity algorithm [35]. Three communities emerge from the female network, including action, family, and romance. And five communities are identified from the male network, including action, family, romance, crime, and career. Only nodes of 500 or more links are labeled.

(TIFF)

Click here for additional data file.

The distribution of adjectives, verbs, and nouns in word co-occurrence network.

a-c. The distribution of adjectives (a, green labels), verbs (b, blue labels), and nouns (c, red labels) in the female word co-occurrence network as introduced in S4A Fig. d-f. The distribution of adjectives (a, green labels), verbs (b, blue labels), and nouns (c, red labels) in the male word co-occurrence network as introduced in S4B Fig. Word categories are detected using the Penn Treebank tagset [36].

(TIFF)

Click here for additional data file.

Men are more likely than women to be described using verbs on the co-occurrence with the other gender.

We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). For each movie synopsis, movie script, or book under study, we select ten words surrounding the names of the leading characters (five words before and five words after) across all the sentences containing both names of the female and male leading characters. We detect word categories using the Penn Treebank tagset [36] and calculate the probability of observing verbs, P(verb), across all 10-word samples for females or males within each dataset. Bars show the values of P(verb), blue for males and orange for females. The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

This Finding is Robust across Time Periods. We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). The increase in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender across different times, measured in the average of positive regression coefficients k, are shown as bars (blue for males and orange for females). The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

This Finding is Robust across Genres. We analyze three datasets, including 6,087 movie synopses (a), 1,109 movie scripts (b), and 7,226 books (c). The increase in happiness conditional on the co-occurrence with the other gender for various types of movies and books, measured in the average of positive regression coefficients k, are shown as bars (blue for males and orange for females). In the Gutenberg book dataset, T represents technology, A represents general work, F represents Local History of the Americas, D represents World History and History of Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, New Zealand, etc., C represents Auxiliary Sciences of History, Q represents Science, B represents Philosophy, Psychology, Religion, P represents Language and Literatures. The lines on the top of the bars show one standard deviation. Asterisks indict P values. * P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, and ns non-significant. The result is significant across the three datasets.

(EPS)

Click here for additional data file.

Explanation of S1–S8 Figs.

We analyze overall emotion, negative emotion, a life unpacked during the co-occurrence, controlling story genres and periods and robustness check of regression models.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

22 Jul 2019

PONE-D-19-16923

The Cinderella Complex: Word Embeddings Quantify Gender Stereotypes in Movies and Books

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr Wang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Sep 05 2019 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ilya Safro, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please ensure that you refer to Figures 4 and 8 in your text as, if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the figure.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Authors,

Thank you very much for submitting your paper for publication with PLOS One. Both reviewers agree that the paper requires a major revision. Please read carefully and address all their comments.

Best regards,

Ilya Safro

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The paper presents a computational analysis of gender stereotypes in movie synopses, movie scripts, and books from the project Gutenberg. Three types of analysis are performed:

1. Comparison of happiness changes for male and female characters when they interact;

2. The influence of happiness changes for male and female characters on movie quality and popularity;

3. Comparison of word usage in movies with the leading male or female character.

The paper studies an important problem of gender stereotypes that persist over the years in English fiction books and movies. It presents several interesting analyses that shed light on the problem from different perspectives. However, the authors tend to over-generalize their conclusions. For example, the higher increase in happiness for female characters may be due not to the presence of a male character (“the Prince”), but to the overall tendency of describing female characters with more emotional words. The authors can compare the emotional changes (increases and decreases in happiness) for female and male characters over the whole course of the story (not only when the two characters interact). Similarly in Sec. 3 (Unpacking the lives of female and male characters), the authors can analyze all the words describing the male and female characters to discover the main clusters/topics/communities.

Further, many details of the analyses need clarification:

- How do you measure happiness for different characters (male and female) in the same sentence/paragraph where both characters appear (co—occurrence)?

- Fig. 2-4: Do you take into account only positive slopes (as mentioned in P. 4)? Do both characters have to have a positive slope in emotional change for the text snippet to contribute to the average? Why don’t you consider negative slopes? Women can be in general described with more emotional words.

- It would be beneficial to provide statistical significance for all comparisons in the paper (e.g., in Fig. 2, 3, 4, 7).

- Fig. 2: “The increase in happiness is quantified by the weighted average of positive OLS regression coefficients” -> what are the weights? How do you get them?

- Table 1: please provide more explanations. Do you fit one regression model with all these variables? What do these variables mean? What do the stars mean? The gender of the leading character has a big impact on both quality and popularity of the movie. It will be interesting to see the impact of emotional change separately on movies with a male or female leading character.

- Sec. 3, p. 6: “… we separate the movie synopsis data into female and male groups” -> How? Based on the gender of the main character?

- Sec. 3, p. 6: why do you look for words “before and after the co-occurrence of characters to construct word co-occurrence network”? How do you separate which words describe which character? Why don’t you simply look at words around a single character (male or female)?

The authors need to at least acknowledge that there are many sources of potential errors in their analysis pipeline, e.g.:

- Automatic process of obtaining happiness scores is error-prone (correlation with manually obtained scores is 0.53);

- Happiness scores of individual words can change dramatically in some contexts (e.g., in the presence of negation);

- Automatic process of main character and their gender identification is error-prone.

It would be interesting to analyze gender stereotypes over time, especially in movies, to see if there have been any changes/improvements in the last years.

Minor comments:

- The paper needs thorough proof-reading.

- The figures are of low quality and hard to read.

- P. 4: “Figure 7” -> “Figure 3”?

- Fig. 1: name highlighting is wrong.

- Fig. 5 and 6: legends are almost the same, need fixing. Fig. 6: “female” -> “male”? Also, 1,750 (female) + 4,337 (male) = 6,087 movie synopsis. What about the rest of 6,657 movie synopsis?

Reviewer #2: The manuscript "The Cinderella Complex: Word Embeddings Quantify Gender Stereotypes in Movies and Books" examined whether and how much the so-called Cinderella complex is present in books and movie synopsis and scripts. Specifically, the authors aimed to identify how stories of movies and book contribute to perpetrate gender stereotypes. I think that this paper has many merits, in specific the authors conducted rigorous analyses of the texts that allowed to identify how stories contain a specific representation of women. However, I think that the manuscript needs to be deeply revised to improve its quality. In the following I will elaborate my major concerns.

Introduction

I have two major points that should be addressed in the introduction.

The first is related to gender stereotypes. They are simply cited with no explanation of what they actually are. Which are the contents of gender stereotypes and which are they functions? Social Psychological research have clearly shown that there are stereotypical expectations according to which women should be warm, communal, sociable, kind, etc, whereas women should be competent, agentic, skilled and assertive (for reviews see, Ellemers, 2018; Eagly, Wood, & Diekman, 2000). These stereotypes derive from the social roles historically attributed to men and women and contribute to maintain gender inequality in the society (especially in the workplace) at different levels. I think that this should be considered I the introduction and also in the general discussion to improve the broad quality of the paper. Indeed, gender stereotypes are very often mentioned by never explained deeply. Also, I wonder whether the Cinderella effect can be considered a stereotype. If yes (and I am not completely sure about it) the authors should motivate this possibility considering relevant scientific literature. In this vein, I would ask to motivate with more reference if the Cinderella complex could be considered a theory. Is this really a theory? For which scientific area? In the GD it should be also discussed how the Cinderella complex in movies and book can contribute to perpetrate gender stereotypes and inequality.

Second, when presenting the study, the authors anticipate the results instead of clarifying the hypotheses of their study: “By analysing a large size of stories using word embeddings, we discovered that the so-called Cinderella complex widely exists in movies and novels. In the following sections, we first present our analysis on the case of Cinderella”. They should explicitly state what they expect from the specific analyses and why (the reasons behind these hypotheses clearly grounded on the scientific literature).

Method

The authors should provide more information on how the material has been selected. They wrote “rigorously” but with which criteria? I do not understand how they arrived at the number of 16255 movies. And from these only 6657 were selected with the criteria of the length of the synopsis? The same comment applies to books.

As far as the “fortune” measure, did they use only the words cited in the text (i.e., success, happy, lucky, and failure, sad, unlucky)? If this is the case, this should be extensively motivated, because many other words could be related to the “fortune” construct. Importantly, why “fortune”? This should be anticipated in the theoretical part of the paper. How the aim of the study to look for the Cinderella complex in story telling is achieved by analysing the “fortune” of the character? This is a major point that the authors should address.

Why does the first study compare Cinderella and Forrest Gump? How Forrest Gump was chosen? It seems to me that they are not comparable for many reasons.

Results

The regression table is not clear to me. Beta, F and p values are missing. What are the values in parentheses? Moreover, how many models were run? Moreover, I do not fully understand why the result showing a higher relation between happiness of women and popularity could be interpreted as in line with the Cinderella complex or at least the fact that gender stereotypes are appreciated. This should be clearer commented.

It could be interesting also examining the relation between the number of co-occurrences and increase happiness.

Discussion

The specific and general implications of the results are poorly discussed. For instance, why books and movies with male characters include more verbs than those with female main characters? Here I would like to see a discussion concerning, for example, the agency characteristics stereotypically attributed to men and this result. Moreover, why adjectives are more represented for female characters? How this result could be interpreted? One possibility is that women are described in more abstract terms related to their traits and therefore are represented in a more complex way than men? Moreover, adjectives lead to inferences of stability of these traits, which are perceived as difficult to change (See Maass, 1999). In this line of reasoning, which are the implications for gender stereotypes?

At the beginning of the manuscript, the authors write about moral tales. Could this argument be discussed in the GD in order to explain how morality is related to gender stereotypes and the role of movies and book to perpetrate gender inequality though these morality norms?

Finally, it should be interesting some comments related to language use and the content of gender stereotypes, that is how language contribute to the maintenance of these stereotypes (see Menegatti and Rubini, 2017).

Minor points:

The numbers of pages are missing, they should have been added to facilitate the reading and revision. Manuscript text should also be double-spaced.

The manuscript ends with “etc”. This should be avoided.

References

Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Traunter (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 69, 275–298.

Maass, A. (1999). Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype perpetuation through language. In M. P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 31, pp. 79121). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Menegatti, M. & Rubini, M. (2017). Gender bias and sexism in language. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford University Press.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

13 Sep 2019

Please kindly refer to the attached file titled Response to Reviewers.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

17 Oct 2019

PONE-D-19-16923R1

The Cinderella complex: Word embeddings reveal gender stereotypes in movies and books

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr Wang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Dec 01 2019 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ilya Safro, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I would like to thank the authors of the manuscript for their substantial efforts at addressing all the reviewers’ concerns. I found the additional experiments presented in Figures S1-S6 very helpful. I believe their inclusion into the manuscript will strengthen the paper. Unfortunately, right now they are left only as figures in the Supplement with no explanation and no reference in the main body. It would be great to include these experiments and describe what was done, why, and what conclusions can be drawn from them in the main body of the paper or at least in the Supplemental Materials. Also, the authors provided to the reviewers detailed explanations for the experiments, but not all of these explanations found their way into the main manuscript. In particular, I think it is important to mention that happiness score normalization is done within a character, and what experiments were performed to confirm robustness of the results in Table 1 to story intensity and the gender of the leading character.

There are still some missing details:

- “We accumulate the happiness curve across sentences or paragraphs …” (p. 20) and “We then sum the averaged happiness scores across sentences … to obtain the emotion curves” (p. 6). What do you mean by “accumulate the curve”? Do you really sum the scores across sentences or do you just plot the scores for all the sentences? Do you do any sort of curve smoothing?

- Fig. 8a: Why are the frequency numbers (y axis) less than 1 (negative powers of 10) for movie synopsis?

Phrasing:

- “… men are more likely to use verbs than women” (p. 5) and “Males use more verbs than females” (Fig. 6). I think you mean that men are more likely than women to be described using verbs.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Michela Menegatti

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

28 Oct 2019

We are grateful for the opportunity to revise the manuscript in response to these thoughtful reviews, and we believe that the paper is much stronger for having incorporated the suggestions from the reviewers.

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

5 Nov 2019

The Cinderella complex: Word embeddings reveal gender stereotypes in movies and books

PONE-D-19-16923R2

Dear Dr. Wang,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Ilya Safro, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

15 Nov 2019

PONE-D-19-16923R2

The Cinderella complex: Word embeddings reveal gender stereotypes in movies and books

Dear Dr. Wang:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ilya Safro

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE