Smith, Lauren Keira MarieBegsieker, Hilary B.Wolfe, Sarah Elizabeth2026-06-012026-06-012025-11-19https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000460https://hdl.handle.net/10012/23488© 2025 Smith et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Climate change increases water crises’ frequency and intensity, requiring more effective solutions and water management. Environmental scholars have found gender-diverse teams make more sustainable, efficient, and equitable solutions. However, women remain under-represented in water management, hindering effective decision-making. Further, water crisis communications carry inextricable mortality reminders: In a water crisis, access to a life-sustaining resource is threatened. Terror Management Theory stipulates that these mortality reminders activate predictable human responses to assuage the anxiety from thinking about our own demise, responses that include strengthening ingroup identities and distancing from outgroups. These responses may exacerbate gender biases already present in homogeneous management contexts, potentially limiting effective water management outcomes. We empirically tested effects of (a) a standard mortality reminder, (b) a water crisis reminder, and (c) a painful but non-life-threatening control reminder on judgements of same- or different-gender water managers. Ambivalent sexism (a framework consisting of hostile and benevolent sexism subcategories) was included as a moderator variable, revealing significant interacting effects based on participants’ benevolent sexism levels. Benevolent sexism (BS) stems from the belief that women need to be protected by men, creating prejudiced behaviours that may appear protective but in actuality harm gender equity. We found (a) water crisis reminders evoked responses similar to the standard mortality reminders and (b) significant interacting effects emerged regarding existential threat, benevolent sexism, and decision-makers’ gender. Specifically, control group males rated the water manager more positively, regardless of gender; male participants higher in BS rated the woman water manager more positively, regardless of reminder condition; and female participants lower in BS rated the woman water manager less positively in the threat reminder conditions. Reasons for these outcomes are explained alongside implications for effective water management. Thus, water crisis communications, mortality reminders, and sexism can influence gender bias in water management, negatively influencing sustainable water outcomes.enAttribution 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/water managementgender discriminationsexual and gender issuesdecision makingfearsocial psychologyanxietyclimate changeArticle