3 stage model of gender development
Gender identity, 2-3yrs:
Gender stability, 4-5yrs:
Gender constancy, 6-7yrs:
Evolutionary
Traits facilitate survival, transmission of these traits favoured over generations
-increase chances of mating and survival
Men can’t give birth, multiple young (fertile) partners (maximise paternity), less resources in children
Women carry foetuses, invest in parenting, fewer sexual partners, long-term providers
Children’s play:
Evolutionary criticisms
X- can’t account for similarities or differences in general behaviour
X- do not specify mechanisms
X- descriptive and post hoc, lacks scientific rigour, do not acknowledge environmental pressures
X-self-report data
Hormone account
Role androgens play
Transgender children- biological accounts of gender, used as evidence gender has biological component
-play and wear clothes, match their idea of gender
Androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS):
-genetically male, external female genitalia
Cognenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH):
-male genitalia in females, choose active play and play fighting
Hormone account criticisms
X- causal link between hormones and behaviour has not been established
-hormonal influences cannot be disentangled from social ones
X- lack of relationship between prenatal hormones and gender linked behaviours
-whether hormonal factors could be basis for gender-differentiated conduct
Cognitive Development Theory
Kohlberg (1966)
Develop concepts of gender from those around them- observation, inference and practice
Children don’t realise gender remains stable, 3yr think gender change of clothing does
Gender constancy:
-positively value their gender identity, behave congruently—> gratifying
Low constancy play with toy from both adverts
High constancy less likely to play with opposite gender toy
Cognitive development theory
Criticisms
X- Long before gender constancy children prefer to play with gender traditional toys
X-gender difference in colour present by 3 years
X- 2yr olds can sort pictures of stereotypical toys, clothing and appliances
X- constancy not prerequisite for gender typing and development
Gender schema theory
MARTIN & HALVERSON (1981)
Gender types behaviours begin when children can label others and their own gender
Develop gender schemas- include knowledge of activities and interests, personality and social attributes, scripts about gender-linked activities—> consistent with a schema
Martin & Ruble (2004):
Gender schema theory criticisms
X- no evidence infants possess schemas, girls greater flexibility
-misremembered gender of child playing with toys
Social schema theory
BANDURA & BUSSEY (1999)
3 interacting causal factors:
Behaviour develops in 3 ways:
Gender differences
Mathematical thinking
Children view boys and girls as quail in ability, men as better than women
Parents estimate sons IQ to be higher than daughters
Differences emerge in secondary school, but difference is very small
Girls= higher maths anxiety, less confidence
Gender differences
Spatial skills
Comparing, manipulating, transforming mental pictures:
Difference largest for rotation, then perception, then visualisation —> getting smaller
Boys get more experience interacting in spatially complex environments
Gender differences
Aggression
Physical aggression emerges 1st bday—> biting, hitting
5% male toddlers, 1% female
2 types:
Girls use indirect more
Male variability hypothesis
SHIELDS (2002)
Men greatly vary in their abilities, women assumed to be the same
Education less valuable for women, less likely to achieve as much as men
- should be confined to role of wife and mother
Gender similarity hypothesis
HYDE (2005)
Studies analysing evidence for gender differences:
-strength, moral reasoning, cheating, problem solving, self-esteem, leadership
78% report small/close to 0 effects
Medium effects in throwing speed and distance; sexuality and physical aggression
Makes and females alike on most psychological variables, differences within gender are larger