GHRN

Background/Objectives: With the increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in public communication, concerns have grown that gender-inequitable expressions may be reproduced or amplified through automated systems. This study examined gender-inequitable terminology used by public institutions in Jeju and explored its implications for gender-sensitive communication in the AI era.

Methods: A structured online monitoring study was conducted on 40 public institutions in Jeju from April to August 2019. A total of 23,171 online posts, including notices, press releases, and informational posts, were reviewed. Through qualitative coding, 439 occurrences of gender-inequality terminology were identified and categorized into 40 representative terms. Dictionary meanings, contextual characteristics, and semantic patterns were analyzed to determine gender bias, discriminatory origins, and institutional usage tendencies.

Results: Many expressions carried patriarchal or gender-role biases at the lexical level, including lineage-based terms (gajang, sibumo) and stigmatizing labels for women (mimangin). Gender-marked occupational titles (e.g., female police officer) reflected male-default linguistic structures, while sexually objectifying expressions, though less frequent, held strong symbolic impact. Jeju-specific sociocultural factors further contributed to the persistence of certain expressions. Several terms also showed high susceptibility to algorithmic amplification, as AI systems may reproduce or intensify gendered linguistic patterns.

Conclusions: Gender-inequitable expressions remain embedded in institutional communication and pose risks of being reinforced by AI-driven systems. Establishing bias-free terminology and strengthening gender-sensitive review processes are essential for preventing the algorithmic perpetuation of structural inequalities. These findings offer practical evidence for developing institutional guidelines, staff training resources, and AI-safe terminology standards.

The advent of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have fundamentally reshaped communication structures across society. As online platforms have become the primary channels for information dissemination, particularly within public institutions, the influence of language on social perception, value formation, and public discourse has intensified. Although AI-driven language models and voice-recognition systems are often perceived as neutral and objective technologies, a growing body of research indicates that these systems inevitably absorb and reproduce the sociocultural biases embedded in their training data [1–3]. In particular, gendered linguistic patterns may be amplified or perpetuated through automated digital processes, raising concerns about the reproduction of gender inequality in contemporary communication environments [4–6].

Gender-inequality terminology is not merely a linguistic issue but a reflection of deeply rooted social, historical, and cultural structures. Korean society has long been shaped by patriarchy, familism, and male-centered social hierarchies, within which gender roles have been normalized and reproduced through everyday language practices [7–9]. According to the World Economic Forum’s Gender Gap Index (GGI), Korea consistently ranks low across multiple dimensions, including economic participation, wage equality, and political empowerment [10]. National gender statistics further show that women’s labor force participation rate was 52.8%, yet women accounted for only 38.6% of regular employees, and the gender wage gap remained substantial, demonstrating that structural inequality persists despite ongoing policy efforts [11]. These conditions underscore the need to examine linguistic practices that may reinforce or obscure gender disparities.

In the Korean context, gender inequality has long been reinforced through deeply rooted patriarchal norms that shape expectations for men and women across family life, education, employment, culture, and public institutions. Despite social and economic development, women continue to face structural challenges, including lower labor force participation, persistent wage gaps, and limited representation in decision-making roles. These inequalities are not simply individual experiences but reflect broader sociocultural forces that have historically positioned women within constrained gender roles. Recent analyses further suggest that misogynistic expressions and gender-stereotyped language are increasingly circulated in online spaces, contributing to the normalization of discriminatory attitudes in everyday communication [10, 11]. These realities highlight the urgent need to reassess gender-unequal expressions within public communication and reinforce the importance of developing gender-equitable terminology in contemporary society.

Language serves not only as a communicative tool but also as a mechanism that reflects and shapes power relations, social hierarchies, and gendered subjectivities. Poststructuralist feminist scholarship has emphasized that language constructs individual experience, identity, and perception of gendered realities [12-14]. Because linguistic meaning is historically and contextually situated, certain expressions can reinforce symbolic violence by reproducing gendered norms and inequalities. Consequently, analyzing gender-inequality terminology is an essential step toward understanding broader sociocultural structures and advancing gender-sensitive communication.

The Jeju region, influenced by its insular geography and unique historical context, has developed distinct gendered cultural patterns. While the region is often associated with strong female figures such as the haenyeo (women divers), patriarchal norms remain deeply entrenched beneath the surface. Local expressions such as “wangbari,” which historically elevated men’s social status due to demographic and economic factors, continue to influence gender dynamics in everyday life [15, 16]. Despite a high proportion of dual-income households, caregiving, household labor, and ceremonial responsibilities continue to fall disproportionately on women, while gender-related issues are often underreported due to social norms discouraging open discussion [17, 18].

In response to these challenges, the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province has implemented long-term initiatives such as the “Gender-Equal Jeju, More Like Jeju” projects aimed at enhancing gender awareness and fostering a more equitable regional culture [17]. Among these initiatives, improving gender equality in everyday language has been highlighted as a foundational strategy for shifting public perceptions. Because public institutions play a central role in shaping social discourse through official communication, examining their online language practices is essential for promoting gender-sensitive communication across the community.

Therefore, this study systematically monitored online posts from public institutions in Jeju to identify the use of gender-inequality terminology, analyze its linguistic characteristics, and categorize its contextual patterns. Also, the research aims to provide direction for developing gender-equitable language policies and improve public awareness of gender-sensitive communication. The findings contribute to understanding how gendered expressions are reproduced in the AI-driven digital communication era and offer foundational evidence for advancing gender equality within the local community.

Study Procedures and Design

This study examined gender-inequality terminology in online posts produced by public institutions in Jeju by identifying occurrences, analyzing semantic characteristics, and proposing strategies for improving gender-equitable language use. The study consisted of three components: 1) assessing the current status of gender-inequality terminology; 2) conducting qualitative case analyses; and 3) suggesting improvement strategies.

A qualitative case-analysis design was conducted. Textual data, such as public notices, press releases, and online promotional materials, were systematically collected from institutional websites. Gender-inequality terminology was identified and categorized into three domains: gender-stereotypical expressions, sexual objectification, and derogatory or insulting expressions. Extracted cases were coded using a predefined framework and refined through team-based discussions. Typical coding examples included gender-marked occupations, relational descriptors, and culturally embedded patriarchal expressions.

Monitoring Targets and Quality Control

Monitoring was conducted in two phases. During the preliminary phase, all public institutions in Jeju were reviewed, their website structures were examined, and institutions likely to contain gender-inequality terminology were identified. Based on this assessment, 40 institutions were selected for the main monitoring, which was conducted from April to August 2019 and focused on text-based postings such as notices, press releases, and announcements. All materials were stored digitally and analyzed systematically, with expressions or sentences implying gender-inequality terminology serving as the unit of analysis.

The monitoring team consisted of 13 personnel, three team leaders (assistant professors or higher) and ten trained monitoring staff selected through interviews based on gender sensitivity and familiarity with online text analysis. To ensure consistency and reliability, monitors received training on gender-inequality terminology, gender-sensitivity principles, gendered language, and the Framework Act on Gender Equality, along with practical coding instruction. Regular consensus meetings, monthly team meetings, and expert advisory sessions were held, ensuring the credibility, confirmability, and dependability of the qualitative research process.

Data Analysis Procedure

Textual data were analyzed through a qualitative coding process. Suspected gender-inequality expressions were first identified and open-coded into meaningful units. Codes were refined through axial and selective coding, followed by an integrated analysis to identify key themes and implications for improving gender-equitable language use.

Status of Gender Inequality Terminology in Jeju Public Institutions

This study monitored online posts from 40 public institutions in the Jeju region over a five-month period from April to August 2019 to identify the use of gender-inequality terms and to analyze their types and semantic characteristics. The monitoring process consisted of a preliminary monitoring phase followed by a main monitoring phase. A total of 23,171 posts—including announcements, press releases, and informational notices—were reviewed during the entire period, and 439 instances of gender-inequality terms were identified. The number of cases varied by institution depending on the nature of each institution’s work, posting frequency, and linguistic practices within its communication environment.

Monitoring revealed that a total of 40 gender-inequality terms were used across documents produced by public institutions in Jeju (Table 1). These terms appeared repeatedly in various types of official texts, including announcements, press releases, event information, and institutional introductions. Although the numerical proportion of these terms may seem relatively small compared to the total number of documents, even a single occurrence carries significance because public documents are expected to rely on formal and standardized language. Thus, the low frequency of usage does not necessarily indicate the establishment of gender-sensitive language practices.

Jeju has a long-standing sociocultural context characterized by clearly divided gender roles, influenced by its geographic features as an island and its unique cultural history. Traditionally, Jeju women have been recognized for their labor-intensive roles—such as the work of haenyeo, yet simultaneously expected to take primary responsibility for housework, rituals, and caregiving. This dual burden has persisted into the present to varying degrees and may discourage active identification or critique of gender-biased expressions in public discourse. As a result, gender-inequality terms may continue to appear not because they are widely accepted but because sociocultural norms reduce the likelihood of detecting or questioning such language.

By institutional type, media organizations demonstrated relatively higher occurrences of gender-inequality terms. This trend appears to stem from the frequent need to quote event names, institutional titles, or other proper nouns that contain pre-existing gendered expressions. Therefore, the higher frequency is understood as a result of structural characteristics of media work, rather than deliberate discriminatory usage. In contrast, general administrative institutions adhere more strictly to standardized language norms, resulting in lower direct usage of overtly gender-biased terms. Nevertheless, some documents still contained expressions rooted in traditional gender role assumptions.

Across the 40 institutions examined, a total of 439 instances of gender-inequality terms were confirmed. Among the 40 recurring terms, several had already been replaced with gender-equal alternatives in other regions. However, these legacy expressions continued to be used in Jeju public documents, indicating that systematic guidelines and internal review mechanisms for gender-sensitive language have not yet been fully established.

Classification of Gender Inequality Terminologies

The 40 identified gender-inequality terms were categorized into three types based on their structural characteristics and contextual usage: 1) expressions grounded in gender stereotypes and bias, 2) sexually objectifying expressions, and 3) derogatory or demeaning expressions. This classification was developed through an integrated review of dictionary definitions, actual usage contexts, and recurrent patterns across documents.

1) Expressions Based on Gender Stereotypes

This category includes expressions that assign specific roles, traits, emotions, or expectations to particular genders. Terms such as ajumma, agassi, and chonggak appear as simple labels but implicitly convey assumptions related to age, marital status, or appearance. These expressions function to categorize individuals into fixed social roles and identities. Other terms, such as motherhood and fatherhood, may reinforce traditional expectations by associating emotional or behavioral attributes with specific genders. When used repeatedly in official documents, these expressions may reinforce fixed gender role expectations within public discourse.

2) Sexually Objectifying Expressions

This category includes expressions that depict women primarily in terms of appearance, marriageability, or relational status rather than as independent social actors. Terms such as virgin, bride-to-be, and young lady for marriage suggest that women exist within relational or evaluative frameworks shaped by male-centered norms. Even when used without explicit discriminatory intent, these terms risk perpetuating objectification because of their symbolic associations. Although the frequency of such expressions was relatively low, their symbolic and social impact is substantial, making their presence in public documents problematic.

3) Derogatory and Demeaning Expressions

Derogatory expressions, such as low-class woman, wench, or gendered terms derived from animal labels, explicitly demean or belittle a particular gender. These terms inherently contain discriminatory nuances at the dictionary level and were deemed highly inappropriate for use in any public institution. Some expressions continue to appear due to their status as traditional or historically common vernacular, but their usage in official documents risks reinforcing gender-biased perceptions. Additionally, job titles that unnecessarily specify gender (e.g., female civil servant, female doctor) contribute to maintaining a linguistic structure that treats men as the unmarked norm.

The analysis of gender-inequality terms revealed several overarching characteristics. Importantly, this investigation moved beyond counting occurrences and examined the semantic, cultural, and contextual dimensions of each expression to better understand the gendered nature of public language in Jeju. First, many terms contained gender bias at the dictionary-definition level, meaning that they could convey discriminatory implications regardless of context or intent. When such terms appear in public documents, they may reinforce gender stereotypes through institutional language. Second, the use of gender-marked occupational titles, such as female civil servant or female doctor, reflects a linguistic structure that implicitly treats men as the default category. This undermines efforts to establish gender-neutral and inclusive public language. Third, sexually objectifying expressions demonstrated low frequency but high symbolic impact. Their presence alone indicates insufficient gender sensitivity within institutional language practices. Fourth, the use of gender-inequality terms varied according to the characteristics of each institution. Media and cultural organizations showed higher frequencies, likely due to their reliance on quoting names of local events or traditional expressions. In contrast, administrative, welfare, and educational institutions displayed lower frequencies but still exhibited legacy expressions rooted in gendered norms. Fifth, regional factors, including traditional culture, family structures, and local linguistic practices, contributed to the persistence of certain expressions. These findings suggest that gender-inclusive language policies may require region-specific approaches rather than uniformly applied national guidelines. Overall, the results indicate that gender-inequality terms in Jeju public institution documents are not isolated linguistic accidents but reflect a complex interplay of sociocultural tradition, institutional practices, and habitual language use. Establishing a gender-equitable linguistic environment will require not only the replacement of problematic terms but also the development of systematic review mechanisms and long-term strategies for linguistic reform.

Table 1. Lexical definitions and semantic characteristics of gender inequality terminologies identified in public institutional communication

No.	Gender-Inequality Term	Dictionary Meaning	Analytical Notes
1	Head of household (Gajang)	A person who leads a household; another term for husband	This term reflects a patriarchal gender role that assigns leadership of the household exclusively to men. Such usage reinforces gendered assumptions about family structure. The term should be avoided and replaced with gender-neutral language referring to all family members who contribute to leading the household. Instead of gajang, neutral expressions such as “husband” or “father” should be used depending on the context
2	Career-interrupted women	A woman who leaves her job to devote herself to childcare	This expression reinforces gender-role stereotypes by implying that women must leave employment to take responsibility for childcare. It also devalues the period spent in childcare as “lost career time.” The issue is not a woman’s “career break” but employment discontinuation due to structural barriers. Therefore, the preferred expression is “women with employment interruption” or “employment-discontinued women,” as recommended in the Seoul Gender-Equal Language Dictionary.
3	Curvy body	A term describing an idealized female body shape	This term represents socially constructed ideals of women’s bodies and reinforces unrealistic physical expectations. It objectifies women by evaluating them primarily based on appearance. Such expressions should be avoided since they promote sexualization and gender bias.
4	Male high school student	A high-school student described with the affixed character ‘male’	As noted in the Seoul Gender-Equal Language Campaign, specifying gender unnecessarily, such as male student, female student, female actor, etc. reinforces gender divisions. Unless gender is contextually relevant (“female writer,” “female leader”), gender-neutral expressions such as “student,” “actor,” “leader” should be used.
5	Female helper (Doumi)	A person who assists others or provides help; ‘mi’ implies 'beautiful woman'. Originally used during the Daejeon Expo to refer to young women assisting visitors	This term carries gendered and appearance-related connotations, suggesting that helping, guiding, or providing service is a woman’s role. Because it reinforces role stereotypes and objectifies young women, alternative neutral terms should be used depending on context.
6	Mother and son (Moja)	A term referring to a mother and her son	The term itself is not inherently inequitable; however, in public communication, it is often used in contexts such as “maternal and child health” to implicitly highlight son over daughter, reinforcing subtle male-centered norms. A more inclusive term should be used (e.g., parents and children) since the current term perpetuates gender bias.
7	Hidden camera /spy-cam	A camera used to record someone without their knowledge	This term trivializes what is fundamentally a serious sexual crime, implying playful secret filming rather than criminal activity. Because it has been widely used in relation to the sexual objectification of women, it should be replaced with an explicit term such as “illegal filming” or “non-consensual recording.”
8	Widow (Mimangin)	A woman left alone after her husband's death; originally meant 'a person who has not yet followed him in death	This term embeds patriarchal and sexist assumptions that a woman's identity is tied to her husband, even in death. It carries stigma that follows women throughout their lives. The expression ‘mimangin’ should be avoided and replaced with the neutral term ‘widow’, which does not carry patriarchal or stigmatizing connotations.
9	Unmarried (Mihon)	A person who is not married	Although the term means “unmarried,” in practice it is disproportionately applied to women and carries negative connotations in expressions like “unmarried mother.” A more neutral expression (“non-married,” “never married,” “single”) or the Korean alternative “Bihon (non-marital choice)” is preferred.
10	Unwed mother (Mihon-mo)	A woman who gives birth without being married	This term presumes that marriage is the normative and legitimate condition for childbirth, reinforcing patriarchal family structures. It stigmatizes women who give birth outside marriage. Alternatives such as “single mother,” “solo parent,” “unmarried parent,” “one-parent family,” or ‘non-marital pregnant woman’ should be used depending on context.
11	Explosive mom	A mother who cannot control her anger and suddenly yells at her children	This expression is gender-biased because similar behaviors by fathers are rarely labeled in this way. It reinforces the gendered assumption that childcare is a woman’s responsibility and frames mothers as emotionally unstable or less mature than fathers. Such terminology should be avoided due to its tendency to stigmatize mothers disproportionately.
12	Boy / Boys’ group	A young, not yet fully mature male child	While the dictionary meaning itself is not inherently inequitable, in practice the term was used in a context referring to both male and female children, yet the expression only highlights boys. This reflects a male-centered linguistic bias. When referring to mixed-gender groups, neutral alternatives such as “children’s group,” “students’ group,” or “youth group” are more appropriate.
13	Superman	A person with extraordinary physical or mental abilities; also used to describe a man who excels in work, childcare, household duties, and family roles	This term reinforces patriarchal gender roles by idealizing a man who perfectly fulfills both traditional and contemporary roles. It normalizes unrealistic expectations for men while simultaneously reproducing rigid gender norms. Such expressions should be avoided as they perpetuate distorted social views of masculinity and familial responsibility.
14	Husband’s parents (Sibumo)	Father-in-law and mother-in-law on the husband’s side	This term is rooted in patriarchal norms that place the husband’s family above the wife’s. It linguistically reinforces male-centered lineage and gender hierarchy. Gender-equal language guidelines recommend replacing it with “parents-in-law” or simply “parents”, depending on context to avoid privileging the husband’s lineage.
15	All-day care in mother’s arms (Eomma-pum care)	An after-school program where teachers care for children until parents can pick them up	The expression implies that childcare is the mother’s responsibility, reflecting patriarchal and gender-role stereotypes. Since childcare is a joint responsibility of parents, any terminology that evokes the image of a mother as the sole caregiver reinforces gendered expectations. Neutral alternatives are recommended.
16	Female hero (Yeogeol)	A woman who is brave, spirited, and possesses strong character	Although seemingly complimentary, the term unnecessarily marks gender and implies that bravery or leadership is unusual for women. It reinforces gender stereotypes by treating such qualities as exceptions. Gender-neutral expressions (e.g., “leader,” “hero”) should be used.
17	Female police officer (Yeogyeong)	A woman serving as a police officer	Since “police officer” is not gender-specific, attaching “female” marks gender unnecessarily and reinforces the idea that the default officer is male. As men are not referred to as “male police officers,” the term “police officer” should be used universally.
18	Girls’ high school	A high school attended only by female students	Using “Girls” as a prefix to name institutions reinforces gender division. Although historical school names may legally remain unchanged, in media and public communication gender-neutral naming conventions (e.g., “XX High School”) are recommended to avoid emphasizing gender unnecessarily.
19	Women’s university	A university attended primarily by women.	Similar to “Girls’ high school,” this term gender-marks educational institutions unnecessarily. While institutional names may be historically fixed, public discourse should avoid gender-centered labeling when possible.
20	Actress /female actor	A woman working as an actor or performer	Since acting is not gender-specific, labeling only women as “actresses” reinforces gender division. Neutral use of “actor” is recommended, consistent with contemporary gender-inclusive language practices.
21	Madam / Lady (Yeosa)	A respectful title used to address a virtuous or married woman	Although defined as an honorific, the term often implies lower occupational status and is disproportionately applied to older women. In practice it functions as a gender-biased term tied to marital status and hierarchy. Neutral professional titles or names should be used instead.
22	Women and Family Research Institute	An institute that conducts research on issues related to women and families.	Although not inherently discriminatory, the term may unintentionally suggest that the institution serves women exclusively, reinforcing gendered assumptions. As gender equality advances, a more inclusive institutional title may become appropriate.
23	Female employee (Yeojongeopwon)	A female worker employed in a service or hospitality role	Gender-marking professions perpetuates stereotypes that place women in certain types of work. Neutral terms such as “employee,” “staff,” or job-specific titles should be used instead.
24	Girls’ middle school	A middle school attended only by female students	Gender-marked institutional names reinforce gender separation. Although many schools retain historical names, gender-neutral naming practices in media and public writing are recommended.
25	Female employee (Yeojikwon)	A female employee	This term implies that the default “employee” is male and identifies women as exceptions. Professionally, neutral terms such as “staff member,” “employee,” or title + name should be used.
26	Wangbari (Jeju dialect for adult man)	A Jeju dialect term referring to an adult man treated with elevated status due to the historical scarcity of men	This expression reflects male-dominant cultural values and confers elevated social status only to men. It reinforces gender hierarchy and should be avoided.
27	Maternal grandfather (Oejobu)	Mother’s father(traditional Korean term)	Terms marking solely the maternal side of the family can reflect patriarchal lineage structures that prioritize the husband's family. Gender-equal language guidelines suggest neutral terms such as “grandfather” when context does not require lineage specification.
28	Maternal grandfather (Oehalabeoji)	Mother’s father(standard honorific term)
29	Maternal grandmother (Oehalmeoni)	Mother’s mother	The asymmetry in naming conventions reflects patriarchal lineage norms favoring the husband's side. Neutral terms such as “grandmother” are recommended except when lineage distinctions are essential.
30	Modest lady (Yojosuknyeo)	A woman who behaves with decorum, modesty, and grace	This term is rooted in gender norms prescribing that women must be modest and reserved. It reinforces restrictive expectations for women’s behavior and should be avoided in gender-equal language.
31	Baby carriage (Yumocha)	A wheeled carriage used to carry a young child	Because the term literally includes “mother,” it implies that childcare and mobility responsibilities belong to women. A neutral alternative such as “Yuacha” better reflects shared parental responsibility.
32	Childcare mom (Yuga-man)	A mother engaged in childcare duties	This expression reinforces the stereotype that childcare is inherently a mother’s duty. Neutral alternatives such as “parenting couple,” “caregiving parents,” are recommended.
33	Jagung (literally ‘son’s palace’)	A reproductive organ where the fetus is implanted and grows	In Sino-Korean etymology (not implying literal meaning), the term is composed of the characters for ‘son’ and ‘palace’, which reflects historical male-centered preferences. This construction implies that the organ belongs to a male offspring, embedding a patriarchal gender expectation. To avoid such connotations, a gender-neutral alternative such as pogung (“a house that holds cells”) has been proposed.
34	Low fertility; ‘low birth rate’	Producing fewer children	The term often assigns responsibility for demographic decline to women, reinforcing gendered blame. The more neutral term “low number of births” shifts focus away from women and is therefore preferred.
35	Youth / young man (Cheongnyeon)	A young adult male in physical and mental prime	While not inherently inequitable, the term was used to refer to all young people, making male identity the default. A broader, gender-neutral expression such as “youth” is recommended in inclusive public communication.
36	Adolescent (Cheongsonyeon)	A collective term referring to young people, including boys	In the monitored context, the term was used with a male-centered nuance. Although not discriminatory by definition, its usage reflected gender bias. Neutral gender-inclusive usage is necessary.
37	Dutiful daughter-in-law (Hyobu)	A daughter-in-law who dedicates herself to serving her husband’s parents	This term strongly reflects patriarchal family structures that expect a woman to devote herself to her husband’s parents. There is no equivalent expression for sons-in-law, revealing gender asymmetry. The term should be avoided in gender-equal communication.
38	Dutiful son (Hyoja)	A son who takes good care of his parents	The term itself is neutral, but in the monitored case it was used in a context implying that certain activities (e.g., martial arts) are primarily performed by men. The expression perpetuated gender stereotypes and should be avoided or replaced with neutral terminology.
39	~gun / ~yang	suffixes for young men / young women)	The two suffixes carry different connotations, ‘~gun’ is neutral or friendly, while ‘~yang’ historically carries connotations of inferiority or objectification. Such forms are outdated and should be replaced with neutral address terms such as “Mr./Ms.”, or professional titles.
40	S-line body	A term describing an idealized female body shape	This term sexualizes women’s bodies and reinforces commercially constructed standards of attractiveness. It promotes the commodification of women’s bodies and should not be used in gender-equal communication.

This study systematically analyzed the use of gender-inequality terms in public documents produced by institutions in the Jeju region. The monitoring identified 40 gender-biased terms, many of which carried semantic prejudice at the dictionary level, marked gender unnecessarily, or included direct and indirect forms of objectification. These findings indicate that, despite ongoing institutional efforts to promote gender equality, linguistic practices in public communication continue to reflect entrenched conventions and region-specific cultural characteristics.

First, several terms identified in this study contained discriminatory meanings embedded within their dictionary definitions. Terms such as mimangin (“widow”), hyobu (“filial daughter-in-law”), and jagung (“uterus,” literally “son’s palace”) stem from historical and cultural contexts that conflict with contemporary gender-equality values. When such terms are used in official documents, they risk reinforcing gender-discriminatory narratives at an institutional level.

Additionally, expressions that explicitly mark gender in professional titles, such as “female civil servant,” “female doctor,” or “female farmer”, contribute to a linguistic structure in which men are positioned as the default norm. These expressions connect occupational roles and individual competencies to gender, and when used in administrative documents, they may influence broader societal perceptions of gender roles and expectations.

The findings of this study indicate that the continued use of gender-unequal expressions is not merely a matter of linguistic habit but is deeply rooted in the sociocultural structures of the region. In Jeju, long-standing local traditions and cultural identities have shaped gendered patterns of communication, and these cultural dynamics continue to influence how gender roles are expressed and perceived in everyday language [19]. These historically embedded norms help explain why gender-coded expressions persist in contemporary administrative and public communication, even in the digital environment.

In this context, addressing gender-biased expressions requires more than simply providing alternative terms or issuing guidelines. Prior research emphasizes that promoting language awareness and gender sensitivity through educational interventions is essential for reducing discriminatory linguistic practices [20]. Such approaches support the notion that sustainable change in public communication must be grounded in transforming the underlying perceptions that guide language use.

Moreover, similar patterns have been identified in media and online discourse, where gender-based linguistic biases continue to reinforce normative expectations for women [21]. Because public institutions function as influential communicators within society, their language practices can either challenge or perpetuate such biases. Ensuring gender-equal language in public messaging is therefore crucial for shaping more equitable social norms.

Taken together, the gender-unequal expressions identified in this study can be understood as the product of an interplay between regional cultural traditions, the need for gender-sensitive language education, and the influence of media discourse. This highlights the importance of establishing comprehensive strategies to enhance gender equality in public institutional communication.

In the context of AI-assisted communication, gendered expressions embedded in institutional documents may be reproduced or amplified through automated systems, further underscoring the need for bias-free terminology [1, 2]. Recent evidence demonstrates that generative AI models do not merely reproduce user input but systematically amplify historically embedded gender stereotypes [22]. Ho et al. (2025) show that, even when provided with gender-balanced occupational prompts, large language and image models disproportionately generate male-coded outputs, revealing the extent to which algorithmic systems internalize and reproduce societal gender hierarchies. Their findings suggest that the biases encoded in AI-driven communication tools may inadvertently reinforce gender-unequal linguistic patterns within institutional contexts, further highlighting the urgency of developing bias-free and gender-equitable terminology. Thus, identifying terms that are most susceptible to algorithmic amplification becomes particularly important for preventing automated reinforcement of gender bias.

Although sexually objectifying expressions appeared infrequently, their presence in any context signals a lack of gender sensitivity. Particularly in promotional materials, cultural event descriptions, and festival-related communications, terms emphasizing appearance, relational status, or marriageability function to reinforce normative expectations placed on women. Such usage highlights the need for the immediate development of gender-neutral alternatives and clearer language guidelines for public institutions.

Furthermore, cultural and regional characteristics played an important role in the continued use of certain expressions. Jeju-specific terms such as wangbari or lineage-related expressions reflect local identity, yet require modification or contextual reconsideration when evaluated from a gender-equality perspective. This finding suggests that national-level language standards are insufficient on their own; rather, regionally tailored approaches are necessary to effectively promote gender-equitable language in public communication.

To support the practical implementation of gender-sensitive language policies, several major gender-inequality terms identified in this study are presented below with recommended alternatives (Table 2). Rather than offering simple substitutions, these recommendations highlight linguistic areas that require urgent intervention and provide a basis for developing public language guidelines, staff training materials, and AI-safe terminology standards.

Among the 40 gender-inequitable expressions analyzed, a subset of terms exhibited particularly strong potential to reinforce gender stereotypes in both human and AI-assisted communication contexts. These priority terms were identified using three criteria: (1) the degree to which the expression reproduces patriarchal or gender-role ideologies, (2) its frequency and visibility in public institutional discourse, and (3) its susceptibility to amplification by generative AI models that often internalize and reproduce gendered linguistic biases. The selected terms, such as those reflecting patriarchal hierarchy (gajang, mimangin), childcare-related gender-role stereotypes (career-interrupted women, yuga-mam), sexualized descriptors (S-line body, curvy body), gender-marked professional titles (female police officer), and terminology that trivializes criminal behavior (hidden camera), represent linguistic categories that pose the greatest risk for perpetuating structural gender inequality. Replacing these expressions with gender-equal, context-appropriate alternatives is therefore a critical step toward promoting equitable communication standards and preventing the further institutionalization of gender bias through automated AI systems.

Table 2. Priority gender inequality terminologies requiring immediate replacement and recommended gender-equal alternatives

Group	Gender-Inequitable Term	Recommended Gender- Equal Alternative	Rationale
Gender-Role Stereotypes	Gyeongnyeok-danjeol yeoseong (career-interrupted women)	Women with employment interruption	Avoids implying childcare is a woman’s duty; reduces stigma toward women’s career trajectories.
	Yuga-mam (childcare mom)	Caregiving parent(s)	Removes assumption that mothers alone perform childcare; supports gender-equal parenting norms.
	Eomma-pum care (all-day care in mother’s arms)	After-school care class	Eliminates implicit maternal responsibility in institutional childcare program.
Patriarchal Hierarchy	Gajang (male head of household	Household representative / family member	Prevents reinforcement of patriarchal household hierarchy and male-centered leadership norms.
	Mimangin (widow, one who has not followed her husband in death)	Bereaved spouse	Removes deeply patriarchal and discriminatory connotations embedded in historical usage.
	Sibumo (husband’s parents)	Parents-in-law / parents	Eliminates linguistic privilege of the husband’s lineage over the wife’s.
Sexual Objectification	S-line body	Body shape	Removes sexualized standards for women’s appearance; avoids objectification.
Sexual Objectification	Gulgok mommae (curvy body)	Physical build / body contour	Prevents objectifying descriptions centered on women’s bodies.
Mislabeling of Criminal Acts	Molka (hidden camera)	Illegal filming / non-consensual recording	Clarifies criminality and avoids trivialization of sexual violence.
Gender-Marked Professions	Yeogyeong (female police officer	Police officer	Eliminates unnecessary gender marking in professional roles; reduces male-default bias.

This study examined the use of gender-inequality terminology in online postings produced by public institutions in the Jeju region and identified 40 gender-biased terms across 439 instances. The analysis revealed that several of these terms contained discriminatory meanings at the lexical level, while others unnecessarily marked gender or objectified specific groups. Patterns of usage differed by institutional characteristics, and regional linguistic and cultural factors also contributed to the persistence of certain expressions. Recent research further emphasizes that, in the AI-driven communication environment, establishing gender-equal and bias-free terminology is essential to prevent automated systems from reinforcing structural inequalities in public discourse [23, 24].

The findings highlight the continued need for gender-sensitive review of public language practices and suggest that efforts to eliminate biased terms must extend beyond prohibiting specific expressions. Instead, structural language review systems, alternative terminology guidelines, and institution-specific implementation strategies are required. Given the influence of public institutional language on community discourse, strengthening gender-equitable language practices is essential for promoting both administrative credibility and local gender-equality culture. These findings can be directly utilized to develop institutional style guides, gender-sensitive review checklists, and AI-safe terminology databases.

Kim SK, Kim EJ, Kim HK, Song SS, Park BN, Jo KW. Development of a nurse turnover prediction model in Korea using machine learning. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(11):1583.
Lee H, Moon W, Kim S, Lee J, Zhang Y. Exploring the applicability of artificial intelligence for the improvement of nursing practice in Korea. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2023;29(5):564–76.
Yoon JH, Pinsky MR, Dubrawski A, Clermont G, Hravnak M. Artificial intelligence in critical care medicine. Crit Care. 2022;26(1):75.
Park HS, Lee HJ. Artificial intelligence in critical care nursing: current status and future directions. Aust Crit Care. 2023;36(4):101225.
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19-32.
Lifshits I, Rosenberg D. Artificial intelligence in nursing education: a scoping review. Nurse Educ Pract. 2024;80:104148.
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467-473.
Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56.
Rajkomar A, Dean J, Kohane I. Machine learning in medicine. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(14):1347-1358.
World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health: WHO guidance. Geneva: WHO; 2021. (Updated 2025 LMM guidance available).
International Council of Nurses. ICN Code of Ethics for Nurses (Revised 2021). Geneva: ICN; 2021.
Buchanan C, Howitt ML, Wilson R, et al. Predicted influences of artificial intelligence on nursing education: a scoping review. JMIR Nurs. 2021;4(1):e23933.
Lifshits I, Dagan A, Riba S. Artificial intelligence in nursing education: a scoping review. Nurse Educ Today. 2024;130:105935.
De Gagne JC. The state of artificial intelligence in nursing education: past, present, and future directions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(6):4884.
Shin H, De Gagne JC, Kim SS, Hong M. The impact of AI-assisted learning on nursing students’ ethical decision-making and clinical reasoning in pediatric care: a quasi-experimental study. Comput Inform Nurs. 2024;42(10):704-711.
Hong MJ, Park JH, Kim YS, et al. Artificial intelligence on nursing: a scoping review. J Converg Cult Technol. 2024;10(2):311-322.
Lee H, Moon W, Kim S, Lee J, Zhang Y. Exploring the applicability of AI for improvement of nursing practice in Korea. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2023;29(5):564-576.
Kim SK, Kweon OY, Kim HY, et al. Development of a nurse turnover prediction model in Korea using machine learning. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(11):1583.
Yang Y, Kim H, Kim Y. Influences of digital literacy and moral sensitivity on AI ethics awareness among nursing students in Korea. Healthcare (Basel). 2024;12(21):2172.
Park CSY, Kim SJ, Kim JH. Ethical artificial intelligence in nursing workforce management and policymaking: bridging philosophy and practice. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025;22(3):1210.
Shorey S, Ang E, Yumin Z, et al. Virtual training using AI-based conversational agents in nursing education: randomized trial. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(10):e14658.
Shinners L, Aggar C, Grace S, et al. Nurses’ perceptions of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a cross-sectional survey. Digital Health. 2022;8:20552076221078110.
Pesapane F, Codari M, Sardanelli F. Artificial intelligence in medical imaging: threats and opportunities for radiologists. Insights Imaging. 2018;9(5):745-753.
Park HS, Lee HJ. Artificial intelligence in critical care nursing: implications and opportunities. Aust Crit Care. 2023;36(4):101225.
Park Y, Lee J, Kim S. Artificial intelligence in critical care nursing: a scoping review. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2025;79:103793.
Yoo J, Choi J, Kim H, et al. Healthcare professionals’ expectations of medical AI in ER and ICU: a qualitative study. Healthc Inform Res. 2023;29(4):281-292.
Kim EJ, Kim Y, Lee S, et al. Machine learning applications in nursing-affiliated research: methodological characteristics and reporting quality. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2025;55(2).
Hong MJ, Choi Y, Kim S, et al. Research trends in generative AI in nursing: a scoping review. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2025;55(3):468-487.
Yakusheva O. How artificial intelligence is altering the nursing workforce. Nurs Outlook. 2025;73(2).
Qaladi O, Alotaibi K, Almutairi A, et al. AI in nursing administration: challenges and opportunities (Saudi Arabia). PLOS One. 2025;20(8).
Barış VK, Çamcıoğlu T, Baykal Ü. Harnessing machine learning to predict nurse turnover intention: multicountry study. J Nurs Manag. 2025;33(6).
Cucci F, Bellelli G, Scalvini S, et al. The contribution of AI in nursing education: a scoping review. Educ Sci. 2025;15(8):283.
Lifshits I, et al. Artificial intelligence in nurse education – a new sparring partner? Nordic J Digit Lit. 2024;19(3).
Park SH. What should medical students know about AI in medicine? J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2019;19(18):1-6.
Bajwa J, Munir U, Nori A, Williams B. AI in healthcare: transforming the practice. Future Healthc J. 2021;8(2):e188-e194.
Panteli D, Spiel C, Bozorgmehr K, et al. Artificial intelligence in public health: promises, challenges and pitfalls. Lancet Public Health. 2025;10(2).
Jiang F, Jiang Y, Zhi H, et al. Artificial intelligence in healthcare: past, present and future. Stroke Vasc Neurol. 2017;2(4):230-243.
Jung JS, Kim S, Lee K. Current status and future direction of AI in healthcare. HCI. 2020;(KoreaScience record).
Shin YJ, Kim GS. AI-assisted learning in nursing simulation: a narrative review. Clin Simul Nurs. 2021;58:1-9.
Labrague LJ, Al Sabei SD. Integration of AI-powered chatbots in nursing education: a review. Teach Learn Nurs. 2024;19(1):45-52.
Pinsky MR, Dubrawski A. AI and big data in critical care. Crit Care. 2024;28(1).
He J, Baxter SL, Xu J, et al. The practical implementation of AI technologies in medicine. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):30-36.
Yakusheva O, et al. How AI may reshape nurse tasks and staffing models. Nurs Outlook. 2025;73(2).
ITU/WHO Focus Group on AI for Health. FG-AI4H: Ethics and governance of AI for health—references to WHO guidance. Geneva; 2022.
WHO. Artificial Intelligence for Health (brochure & exec. summaries). Geneva; 2021–2024.
Tricco AC, Colquhoun H, Peters MDJ, et al. Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing methodology and application. Syst Rev 2021;10:263.
Seibert K, Domhoff D, Bruch D, Wolf-Ostermann K. Application scenarios for artificial intelligence in nursing care: rapid review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(11).
Choi MJ, Kim J, Lee H. Research trends in generative artificial intelligence in nursing: a scoping review. J Korean Acad Nurs. 2025;55(1).
Kim SH, Lee JY, Park HJ. Relationship between nursing professionalism, AI ethics awareness, and digital health literacy in nursing students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Korean Acad Nurs Adm. 2025;31(1).

Global Healthcare Resaerch Network(GHRN)