Sex Roles, Vol. 49, Nos. 3/4, August 3/4, August 2003 (
°
C
Gender Identity and Adjustment in Middle Childhood 1, 2 1, 3 Priscilla R. Carver,1, 2 Jennifer L. Yuner,1 and !avid G. Perry1, 3
This article has two purposes. The first is to present a brief (and speculative) account of the developmental origins of the several components of gender identity featured in the multidi mensional model of gender identity proposed by proposed by !gan and "erry (2##1). The second is to offer additional empirical support for the construct and discriminant validity of the various gender identity dimensions. dimensions. Children Children ( M age = 11.$ years) were assessed for % components of gender identity& (a) felt gender typicality, (b) contentment with gender assignment, (c) felt pressure for gender conformity, and (d) intergroup bias intergroup bias ( the sentiment that one's own se is superior). ender typicality, gender contentedness, and felt pressure (but not intergroup bias) intergroup bias) related meaningful ways. The case to indees of psychosocial ad*ustment in specific and theoretically meaningful for a multidimensional approach to gender identity is strengthened. "#Y $%R!&' gender identity+ gender typing+ gender roles.
ender identity is a central construct in many accounts of psychosocial development (e.g., arris , 1--$+ accoby, 1--/), yet it has been defined in di verse ways. 0ohlberg (1-) and ucer et al. (1--3) viewed gender identity as nowing that one is a mem ber of one se rather than the other+ 0agan (1-%) regarded gender identity as the degree to which one perceives the self as conforming to cultural stereo types for one's gender+ 4em (1-/1) saw gender iden tity as the degree to which one internali5es societal pressures for gender conformity+ reen (1-6%) and 7pence (1-/$) viewed gender identity as a fundamen tal sense of acceptance of, and of belonging to, one's gender . 8t is conceivable that all of the foregoing (and still other) conceptuali5ations conceptuali5ations of gender identity have merit but that different varieties or facets of gender identity serve different psychological functions or af fect ad*ustment in different ways. Thus, it may be fruit ful ful to regar egard d gend gender er iden identtity ity as a multidimensional
construct and to define gender identity as the col lection of thoughts and feelings one has about one's gender category and one's membership in it. ; re cent study by !gan and "erry (2##1) was built on this premise. !gan and "erry proposed that gender iden tity is composed of five ma*or components& (a) mem bership nowledge (nowledge of membership in a gender category)+ (b) gender typicality (the degree to which one feels one is a typical member of one's gen der category)+ (c) gender contentedness (the degree to which one is happy with one's gender assignment)+ (d) felt pressure for gender conformity (the degree to which one feels pressure from parents, peers, and self for conformity to gender stereotypes)+ and (e) in tergroup bias tergroup bias (the etent to which one believes one's own se is superior to the other). !gan and "erry (2##1) measured the last four of these components of gender identity in preadoles cent children and found the components to be rela tively independent, to be fairly stable over a school year, and to relate to ad*ustment (i.e., selfesteem and peer acceptance) in different ways. ender typicality and gender contentedness were favorably related to ad*ustment, whereas felt pressure and intergroup bias were negatively associated with ad*ustment. ?ins be tween the gender identity constructs and the ad*ust ment indees remained significant when children' s
1
"sychology logy,, :lorid :loridaa 9epartment of "sycho ;tlantic fau.edu. edu. 33%31+ email& perrydg>fau.
() Corporation
#3###2$@#3@#/####-$@#
°
C
2##3 "lenum "ublishing
perceptions of selfefficacy for a wide variety of setyped activities were statistically controlled. This suggests that the gender identity constructs carry im plications for ad*ustment beyond selfperceptions of specific selined competencies. The purposes of the present report are twofold. The first is to offer a brief, and somewhat specula tive, account of the development of the various gender identity components. The second purpose is empirical and represents an attempt to substantiate the valid ity of the gender identity constructs by demonstrat ing theoretically meaningful lins between measures of the constructs and multiple indees of psychoso cial functioning in preadolescent children. Aote that although the developmental account provided in the first part of the article deals with development across a rather broad age span (i.e., the preschool years through early adolescence), the empirical part of the article is based on data collected only from preadoles cent children. Thus, the empirical part is not intended as a test of the developmental model presented in the first part. Be begin with the developmental account and then turn to the present study. G#*!#R I!#*+I+Y I* !#,#L%PM#*+AL C%*+#-+
8t is liely that the earliest emerging of the gender identity components is membership nowledge. This aspect of gender identity develops in a seuence of steps (7laby D :rey, 1-6$). 4y the age of 2.$ or 3 years, most children evidence basic membership nowledge by correctly answering the uestion E;re you a boy or a girlFG, but it is not until several years later that children attain gender constancy, or understand that their se remains invariant across time and changes in surface appearance (e.g., hair length). 4y age or 6, nearly all children attain full gender constancy, thereby eliminating withinse variability on this facet of gender identity. Thus, beyond this age, membership nowledge cannot account for withinse individual differences in other variables, such as psychosocial ad *ustment. This aspect of gender identity, then, is not a focus of the present study. ;lthough full gender constancy is not attained until age or 6, the basic membership nowledge usually achieved by age 3 may be sufficient to set in motion a number of Eintergroup processesG that prompt preschoolers to interact predominantly in samese groups, a phenomenon nown as se segre gation (accoby, 1--/). 8t appears that when children (or adults) believe that they share membership in a
group, a number of identity validation processes come into play. These include attraction to the in group, preferential treatment of the ingroup, and devalua tion and homogeni5ation of the outgroup (Ta*fel D Turner, 1-6-). The se segregation that derives from these is intergroup processes important, largely be cause boys' and girls' groups sociali5e different be haviors and social rules (accoby, 1--/). "reschool children's basic nowledge of their gender and the intergroup processes it inspires prob ably provide the roots for development of three of the gender identity components proposed by !gan and "erry (2##1)Hintergroup bias, felt pressure, and gender contentedness. 8ndividual differences in these components may be slight at first. 9uring preschool, intergroup bias may be a normative, natural con seuence of intergroup processes. owever, with advancing age and sociali5ation, strong samese favoritism is liely to become increasingly imma ture, inappropriate, and socially problematic (!gan D "erry, 2##1+ "owlishta, 1--$). 7trong felt pressure for gender conformity also is normative for young children, who tend to regard gender stereotypes as moral imperatives. This early sense of pressure is dif ficult to trace to specific social learning eperiences (accoby, 1--/). ;s children mae the transition into elementary school, they rela their rigidly held gender rules, gender conformity is seen more as a matter of choice, and felt pressure for gender conformity sub sides. owever, for some older children felt pressure remains strong. "ost preschool felt pressure may be due to developmental delay, but additional factors, such as intro*ection of socially imposed values, prob ably also contribute (4em, 1--3+ 4ussey D 4andura, 1---). ender contentedness also begins during the preschool period. :or most children, contentment with one's gender is high, probably because of inter group cognitions and the gratifying samese affilia tions they promote. owever, some preschoolers are gender dysphoric. 8n etreme cases, such children may be diagnosed with gender identity disorder, especially if they also ehibit strong crossgendertyped behav ior (4radley D ucer, 1--#+ reen, 1-/6+ =eers, 1-/$). !arly gender dissatisfaction may continue for many years. 8n addition, some children may develop gender discontentment at a later age, perhaps if they find a strongly desired activity to be off limits because it is deemed gender inappropriate. ;s children move into the elementary school years, the samese peer group continues to be a ma*or contet for social interaction and sociali5ation, but advances in cognitive developmentHimproved
Gender Identity and Adjustment
social comparison sills, the ability to infer stable traits in the self, and the ability to imagine what the collective other is thining about the selfHset the stage for emergence of the fifth component of gender identityHan estimate of one's gender typicality. Iudg ments of gender typicality are of great importance to preadolescents (0agan, 1-%+ 0ohlberg, 1--+ 7pence D 4ucner, 1--$), despite the fact that felt pressure for gender conformity is subsiding at this age. 8n mid dle childhood, children have a strong intrinsic desire to E*oin in,G to feel they belong, and to see themselves as not terribly different from samese others. 9espite the importance that children attach to fit ting in with their samese peers, within each se there is ample room for children to reach different con clusions about their gender typicality (0agan, 1-%+ 7pence, 1-/$). ;lthough children's groups remain strongly segregated by se throughout childhood, within each se children vary greatly with respect to how much they ehibit prototypical gendertyped behaviors (arris, 1--$+ accoby, 1--/). 7uch within se variations in gender typing provide the raw ma terial on which children cognitively operate to es timate their gender typicality. "resumably, children reach a summary *udgment of their typicality by in tegrating several inds of information, including self observation of salient gendertyped attributes, social comparison, and appraisals communicated by signif icant others. Thus, a sense of gender typicality is cognitively constructed. 8t is important to note that a child's sense of overall gender typicality cannot be assumed to be isomorphic with the child's selfperception of any specific gendertyped attribute (e.g., agentic or com munal traits). The degree to which children ehibit attributes typical of their gender is only modestly correlated across different domains of gender typing (e.g., personality traits, toy and activity preferences, relationship partner preferences, academic pursuits, occupational preferences, fantasy life, and nonverbal characteristics such as styles of speech, gesture, and dress+ uston, 1-/3+ =uble D artin, 1--/). There fore, selfperceived gender typing in any single do main cannot be taen as a standin for overall felt gen der typicality. ; child's estimate of his or her overall gender typicality represents an idiosyncratic weight ing and integrating of selfperceptions of diverse gendertyped attributes (!gan D "erry, 2##1+ 7pence, 1--3+ 7pence D 4ucner, 1--$). The specific gender typed attributes that contribute most strongly to one's overall sense of gender typicality will vary from child to child, though at some points in development certain
(
aspects of selfperceived gender typing are liely to be influential for many children (e.g., a typical or atypical seual orientation may contribute strongly to most early adolescents' sense of gender typicality). 8mpor tantly, the fact that multiple gendertyped attributes contribute to children's sense of gender typicality pro vides some fleibility to children in how a sense of gender typicality can be achieved. :urthermore, the cognitive sills that come with the advent of "iage tian concrete operations (e.g., compensation and con servation) allow children to engage in compensatory identity Erepair wor.G :or eample, a boy who ues tions his gender typicality because of poor athletic ability might restore his sense of typicality by succeed ing in an alternate maletyped arena, such as math or science (7pence D 4ucner, 1--$). Aonetheless, some children will be unable to perceive in themselves a salient and valued same gendertyped attribute that imparts a sense of gender typicality, or will perceive in themselves a salient crossgendertyped attribute that undermines a sense of gender typicality. These children may be prone to a persistent sense of gender atypicality that lasts perhaps many years. This brief synopsis of the development of the components of gender identity suggests that the pe riod of middle childhood presents important chal lenges to children on the gender identity develop ment front. 9uring this period, it is normative and epected that children relinuish or suppress certain oncecherished but now developmentally immature components of gender identity, namely, intergroup bias and felt pressure for gender conformity. ;t the same time, children are struggling to achieve and con solidate a new ind of gender identityHa sense of gender typicality. :or some children, this will not be easy, because, as noted, processes of withingroup dif ferentiation and social comparison present children with ample opportunity to uestion their typicality on genderprototypical dimensions, and not all chil dren will succeed in the compensatory identity repair wor needed to achieve a stable and confident sense of gender typicality. oreover, for some children, the same factors that undermine a sense of gender typ icality are liely also to threaten a sense of gender contentedness.
+/# PR#*+ &+0!Y
The present research was designed to garner fur ther support for !gan and "erry's multidimensional model of gender identity (!gan D "erry, 2##1).
=elations between the gender identity constructs and a broad array of ad*ustment indees were eamined. !gan and "erry found predictable associa tions between the gender identity components and two indees of ad*ustmentHselfesteem and peer acceptanceHbut the inferences that could be drawn from using only these two measures of ad*ustment were limited. The selfesteem assessment was limit ing because the gender identity and selfesteem mea sures were all selfreported, and shared method vari ance may have contributed to associations between them. The peer acceptance assessment was also lim ited because children may be lied or dislied by peers for many different reasons. :or eample, children are about as liely to be re*ected by peers for ehibit ing eternali5ing problems (e.g., aggression) as they are for displaying internali5ing symptoms (e.g., so cial withdrawal+ odges D "erry, 1---). 4ecause an omnibus inde of peer acceptance imparts no infor mation about the social behaviors ehibited by chil dren, using such an inde precludes testing hypothe ses about lins between the various components of gender identity and specific behaviors (e.g., high felt pressure for gender conformity might predict high ag gression and low communal behavior for boys but the opposite pattern for girls).
such inferences. Jur ob*ective was more modestH simply to see whether sufficient evidence eists for the construct and discriminant validity of the gender identity components to mae subseuent longitudinal investigation a sensible investment. 8n this study, the primary measures of ad*ust ment were peer reports of five dimensions of so cial behavior and adaptation& internali5ing problems , victimi5ation by peers, eternali5ing problems, agen tic traits, and communal traits. :or comparison with the peerreported internali5ing problems measure, we also included two selfreported measures of internal i5ed distress& global selfworth and selfperceived peer social competence. lobal selfworth is very highly correlated (negatively) with selfreport measures of depression (arter, 1--/)+ selfperceived peer social competence captures children's sense that they are lied by peers, have friends, and are otherwise faring well in the peer group. ypotheses for each gender identity measure follow. Gender +y1icality
Aumerous theorists have suggested that chil dren evaluate themselves on a dimension of gender typicality and suffer discomfort, even despair, when they come up wanting. Karious bases for the epected lin between gender typicality and psychological wellbeing have been suggested. Children who appraise themselves to be gender atypical may fear ostracism, denial of privileges, or a loss of protection by the group (4ugental D oodnow, 1--/+ Caporael D 4rewer, 1--1). They may also eperience a loss of selfesteem (Ta*fel, 1-/2), negative selfsanctions (4ussey D 4andura, 1---), or simply a sense of being inadeuate as group members (0ohlberg, 1--). Thus, children with a low sense of gender typicality should be prone to aniety, sadness, social withdrawal, selfdeprecation, and other signs of internali5ed dis tress. :urthermore, because children who display these characteristics are seen as easy prey by aggres sive children (!gan D "erry, 1--/+ odges, alone, D "erry, 1--6), those who feel gender atypical should be more liely than other children to be victimi5ed by peers . 8t is liely that some children are more prone to the ill effects of felt gender atypicality than oth ers. 8n particular, low gender typicality should be more disturbing for children who feel strong pres sure for gender conformity than for children who feel no mandate to conform to gender stereotypes. That is, children who believe it is important to be gender
conforming yet appraise themselves as atypical should be maimally distressed. ; final prediction for the gender typicality con struct is based on the idea that estimates of gen der typicality are, at least in part, reflections of selfperceptions of salient genderlined characteris tics. ;s pointed out, a sense of gender typicality is not based eclusively on selfperceived gender typ ing in any single domain (e.g., personality traits) but rather is a more abstracted, integrated assessment about the self reached by synthesi5ing diverse infor mation about one's gender typing. 9espite the fact that gender identity is multiply determined, there are reasons for thining that selfperceptions of agen tic and communal traits assume importance during middle childhood in many children's assessment of their male typicality or female typicality. accoby (1--/) pointed out that preadolescent boys, espe cially when interacting in samese groups, tend to ehibit agentic traits such as competitiveness, dar ing, and assertion, whereas preadolescent girls tend to ehibit communal behaviors such as intimate e change, cooperation, and efforts to maintain social harmony. accoby stressed that although peer in teraction remains strongly segregated by se dur ing this age period, there eist considerable within se differences in children's tendencies to ehibit the traits typical of their se. Thus, gendertyped person ality traits may be one, although certainly not the only, determinant of felt gender typicality in middle childhood. Gender Contentedness
Loung children who are dissatisfied with their gender to the point of being diagnosed with gender identity disorder are decidedly unhappy and socially malad*usted, in part because of the negative social reactions they incur (=uble D artin, 1--/). Jlder children under treatment at clinics for strong gender dissatisfaction also tend to be distressed (ucer D 4radley, 1--$+ ucer, Jwen, 4radley, D ;meeriar , 2##2). !ven among nonclinic samples, variations in gender contentment eist and are liely to affect ad *ustment. The feeling of being at home or not at home in one's body is almost certain to affect satisfaction with the self. :urthermore, the internali5ing problems of children with low gender contentedness should be greatest for children who eperience strong felt pres sure for gender conformity. That is, children who wish they were the other se or who desire to engage in crossse activities should be distressed mainly when
they perceive their social environment to be telling them that they cannot be whom they wish to be.
2elt Pressure
8n addition to serving as a moderator of the de gree to which low gender typicality or low gender contentedness contributes to internali5ed distress, felt pressure should be a negative influence on psycholog ical wellbeing in its own right. ;s emphasi5ed by 4em (1-/1) and by 4ussey and 4andura (1---), children who feel strong pressure for gender typing should be less liely to eplore a wide range of options when de ciding what interests to pursue or talents to cultivate, and therefore they should be less liely to settle on op tions that are maimally fulfilling. This straight*acet ing of self should result in less satisfaction with the self . Thus, children who are eperiencing high felt pres sure for gender conformity should show more signs of internali5ed distress than children who are freer of gender stereotypes . The measures used in the present study also per mitted evaluation of the possibility that felt pressure is associated with specific social gendertyped behaviors. 4em (1--3) proposed that internali5ed societal pres sure for gender conformity disposes men and boys to use power to achieve dominance and disposes women and girls to subordinate their own needs, desires, and interests to those of others. 8n a similar vein, in his treatise on Ereal boys,G "ollac (1--/) argued that felt pressure disposes boys to suppress communal be haviors and to hide feelings of weaness, sadness, fear, and tenderness. These considerations suggest the hypothesis that felt pressure causes children not only to tae on negative components of samegender stereotypes (e.g., antisocial tendencies for boys, sub servience for girls) but also to shun positive compo nents of other gender stereotypes (e.g., communal be havior for boys, agentic traits for girls).
Interrou1 3ias
;s suggested by "owlishta (1--$), intergroup bias may cause preadolescents to eperience difficulty with peer interaction. Children who espouse negative attitudes toward the other se at a time when hetero seual contacts are becoming more accepted and nor mative may be perceived by peers as high in hostility (i.e., eternali5ing problems) or as low in communal tendencies.
M#+/%! Partici1ants
;ll children in the third through eighth grades of a state university laboratory school were invited to participate. Jf the 33 children in these grades, 2# (1M+ -3 boys and 113 girls) received written parental consent for participation+ the children also signed an assent form. The admissions procedures of the school are designed to ensure that the demographic compo sition of the student body reflects that of the state of :lorida as a whole (/M !uropean ;merican, 1/M ;frican ;merican, 13M ispanic, and 1M ;sian ;merican, with annual household income distributed as follows& M N#ON16,%--+ 12M N16,$##ON32,%--+ 22M N32,$##ON$2,%--+ and #M N$2,$## or more). ;p proimately eual numbers of children came from each grade (31, %2, %#, 3#, 2/, and 3$ third through eighth graders, respectively). Children averaged 11 years months of age.%
Measur es
7elfConcept Two a instruments, Puestionnaire and a "eer Aomination 8nventory, were administered. These are described net. 4oth instruments may be obtained from the authors. Sel"%&onept 'uestionn!ire
This %item uestionnaire contained si scales. ;ll items of this uestionnaire (as well as all items on all remaining uestionnaires, ecept for the "A8) were written in the format developed by ,arter (1-/$) to minimi5e the influence of response biases (see e ample item below). 7cale scores were computed by averaging across items and could range from 1 to %. The first 12 items of the uestionnaire were items developed by ,arter (1-/$) to measure glo#!l sel"% (ort) ( items) and sel"%perei*ed peer soi!l o+pe% tene ( items). The Cronbach $ coefficients for these scales were ./1 and .6-, respectively. %
This pro*ect was conducted 2 years after the !gan and "erry (2##1) study but was conducted at the same school. Thus, there is some overlap in the participants of the two studies. This overlap should not pose a problem, because the present pro*ect was not designed as a replication of the !gan and "erry study but rather was in tended simply to identify additional ad*ustment correlates of gen der identity. Aonetheless, it should be acnowledged that the two samples are not entirely independent.
8tems 13O% of the uestionnaire were items de veloped by !gan and "erry (2##1) to assess gender typi!lity ( items), gender ontentedness ( items), "elt pressure (1% items), and intergroup #i!s (/ items). The items of these scales were randomly interspersed. The Cronbach $ coefficients for the four scales, re spectively, were .6#, .6#, ./3, and .6#. The gender typ icality scale assessed the degree to which children thin that their interests, personalities, and competen cies are typical of their gender. ere is a sample item from the gender typicality scale (all sample items from the gender identity scales are from the girls' form)& 7ome girls don't feel they're *ust lie all the other girls their age
4
Kery true 7ort of true for me for me
Jther girls do feel they're *ust lie all the other girls their age
7ort of true for me
Kery true for me
Jther sample items from the gender typicality scale are E7ome girls' don't feel that their personality is similar to most girls' personalities 4
!gan and "erry's felt pressure scale contained 1# items (!gan D "erry, 2##1). Be added % items to improve the scale's reliability and to include more items assessing felt pressure from the self for gender conformity. The 1%item scale contained $ items assessing felt pressure from parents, $ items assessing felt pressure from peers, and % items assessing felt pressure from self .
that girls are more trut)"ul than boys 4
"eerreported social behavior and ad*ustment were assessed with a modification of Biggins and Binder's "eer Aomination 8nventory (Biggins D Binder, 1-1). The 8nventory contained $3 items and included items that tap the following aspects of social behavior& (a) intern!liing pro#le+s (/ items)+ (b) *iti+i!tion (1# items)+ extern!liing pro#le+s (13 items)+ !genti tr!its ($ items)+ and o++un!l tr!its ($ items). The remaining 12 items were positive fillers (e.g., Ee is a fast runner.G). Children checed off the names of samese classmates who fit the behavioral description in each item (unlimited nominations)+ owing to the length of the inventory, children were not ased to nominate otherse peers for the items. ; score for each item was calculated as the percentage of samese classmates who checed the children's name for the item. ;n initial factor analysis on the %1 items of interest yielded four easily interpretable factors that closely conform to the original assignment of items to constructs, ecept that items that assess internali5ing problems loaded along with victimi5ation items on a single factor. 8n addition, three items crossloaded. ; second analysis without these three items was run, and it yielded four pure factors& internali5ing problems (this scale included victimi5ation items and was composed of 1/ items+ e.g., from the boys' form& Ee says bad things about himself.G+ Ee gets piced on by other ids.G)+ eternali5ing problems (12 items + e.g., Ee always has to have his own way.G+ Ee hits and pushes others around.G)+ agentic traits (3 items+ e.g., Ee tries hard to win games and contests.G+ Ee is brave.G)+ and communal traits ($ items+ e.g., Ee tries to get along with everyone.G+ EBhen a id is sad, he tries to mae him feel better.G). ; score on each scale was calcu lated for each child by averaging the scores the child received on the items of the scale. The Cronbach $ coefficients were .-, .-3, .6-, and . /- for the inter nali5ing, eternali5ing, agentic, and communal scales , respectively. Procedur e
The two instruments were administered to children in the spring of the school year. Jther
+a4le I. eans and 7tandard 9eviations of easures
4oys easure
ender identity measure ender typicality ender contentedness :elt pressure 8ntergroup bias ;d*ustment measure 8nternali5ing problems !ternali5ing problems ;gentic traits Communal traits lobal selfworth 7elfperceived peer social competence
irls
M
S
M
S /
3.#2 3.23 2.%$ 2.2$
#.3 #.% #.%3 #.$2
2./1 2.6# 1.61 2.$2
#.2 #.1 #.3#.$6
#.2# #.2$ #.$3 #.%# 3.3# 2.-2
#.1/ #.16 #.22 #.2# #.$/ #.6
#.1$ #.1#.%6 #.%6 3.33 3.#$
#.1$ #.1 #.1#.2# #.$/ #.61
uestionnaires relevant to a pro*ect on attachment were also administered. ;ll instruments ecept the "eer Aomination 8nventory were administered individually to children in two %$min testing ses sions by one of several adult females who read the items to the child. The "eer Aomination 8nventory was groupadministered to children in their class rooms in a 3#min session.
R#&0L+&
=esults are presented in three sections. :irst, se and age differences in the measures are summa ri5ed. 7econd, intercorrelations among the measures are presented. The third section reports tests of hy potheses about relations between gender identity and ad*ustment.
&e5 and Ae !ifferences in Measur es
eans and standard deviations of the measures are given in Table 8, separately by child se. To discern significant se and age differences, each measure was treated as a dependent variable in a multiple regres sion analysis with se and age entered as simultaneous predictors. Bith age controlled, the effect of se was significant for eight measures at p .#$ or better . Bith respect to gender identity, boys scored higher than girls on gender typicality, gender contentedness , and felt pressure, but boys scored lower than girls on intergroup bias. ;s for the ad*ustment indees, boys scored higher than girls on internali5ing problems,
;ll p values in this article are twotailed unless otherwise noted.
+a4le II. Correlations ;mong ender 8dentity easures
ender identity measure 1. ender typicality 2. ender contentedness 3. :elt pressure %. 8ntergroup bias
1 H .31∗∗ −.#1 .#%
2 ∗∗
.2$ H .1 .1-∗
+a4le III.
3
%
.## .16 H .%1∗∗
.2# .# .1 H
Note. Correlations for boys are above the diagonal+ those for girls are below the diagonal. !ntries are partial correlations with age controlled.
eternali5ing problems, and agentic traits, but lower than girls on communal traits. Bith se controlled, the effect of age was sig nificant for si measures at p .#$ or better. Bith increasing age, children reported greater gender typ icality and greater gender contentedness but reduced felt pressure and reduced intergroup bias. Jf the ad *ustment measures, only two showed an association with age& older children reported higher global self worth and higher selfperceived peer social compe tence than younger children. 4ecause of these sundry effects of age, we controlled for age in subseuent analyses . Intercorrelations of Measures
This section reports the intercorrelations among the gender identity variables and among the ad*ust ment indees. =elations between the gender identity and ad*ustment measures are given in a later section. &orrel!tions A+ong 1ender -dentity V !ri!#les =elations among the gender identity variables are given for each se in Table 88. ost associations are low, but some are significant. :or both sees, gen der typicality and gender contentedness are positively correlated, but it will be seen that the two measures relate to ad*ustment in different ways. 8t is interesting that the two EimmatureG forms of gender identityH felt pressure and intergroup biasHare correlated for girls but not for boys, although reasons for this are not clear . &orrel!tions A+ong Adust+ent Me!sures (eer%Report !nd Sel"%stee+ Me!sures) =elations among the ad*ustment indees are given for each se in Table 888. ;lthough many associ
Correlations ;mong ;d*ustment easures ("eer =ep ort and 7elf!steem easures)
;d*ustment measure 1. 8nternali5ing problems 2. !ternali5ing problems 3. ;gentic %. Communal traits $. lobal selfworth . 7elfperceived peer social competence
1
2
H
.1
.%/∗∗
H
−
H
.22∗
−.#/
.6∗∗
.2$∗∗
H
.16
.#%
.2#∗
.##
.22∗
H
.3-∗∗
.2$∗∗
.1$
.%$∗∗
H
−
.3∗∗
−
−.#/
−
.33∗∗
−.#6
−
.1#
−
./∗∗
−
.$∗∗
$ −.13
−.#1
−
% .3$∗∗
.%#∗∗
−
3
.2-∗∗
−
.2-∗∗
.#$ .2#∗
Note. Correlations for boys are above the diagonal+ those for girls are below the diagonal. !ntries are partial correlations with age controlled. ∗ p .#$. ∗∗ p .#1.
ations are significant and several are strong, it will be seen that significant associations between the gender identity measures and the ad*ustment measures are mostly uite specific and theoretically meaningful. Relations of Gender Identity to Peer6Re1orted Adjustment and to &elf6#steem
The relation of each gender identity mea sure to each ad*ustment inde was evaluated in a separate multiple regression analysis (% gender iden tity measures × ad*ustment indees = 2% analyses). 8n each analysis, one of the ad*ustment indees served as the dependent variable. 7e and age were entered as firststep predictors+ a gender identity measure was entered on the second step+ the 3 twoway interactions (age × se, age × gender identity, and se × gen der identity) were tested on the third step+ the three way interaction was eamined on the fourth step. 8n no analysis was the threeway interaction significant. owever, because se differences in certain relations of gender identity to ad*ustment had been predicted, and because several interactions of se with gender identity measure were indeed significant or nearly so (se moderated the relation between gender typical ity and agentic traits, p .#$+ the relation between felt pressure and eternali5ing problems, p .#$+ and the relation between felt pressure and global self worth, p .#-), the relations of gender identity to ad*ustment were eamined separately for each se. These relations are given in Table 8K. The entries in
+a4le I. =elations of ender 8dentity to "eer=eported ;d*ustment (and to 7elf
!steem) ender identity measure
ender typicality ;d*ustment inde
4oys
8nternali5ing problems !ternali5ing problems ;gentic traits Communal traits lobal selfworth 7elfperceived peer social competence
.3$∗∗∗ −.#6 .33∗∗∗ .1% .13 .%%∗∗∗ −
irls .3∗∗∗ −.#.#$ .21∗ .2∗∗ .%/∗∗∗ −
:elt pressure
ender contentedness 4oys .#2 −.#% −.#−.11
.2%∗ .22∗
irls −.1%
.2#∗ −.12 .# .3∗∗∗ ∗ .23 −
4oys
irls
4oys
irls
.#% .1 −.#3 .21∗ .#$
−.#2
−.#1
−.#3
−.12
.11 .1/ −.1% .#
−.#3
.#6
.22∗ −.11 .2#∗ ∗ .21 .#3 −
−
−
8ntergroup bias
−
−
−
−.#/ −.#3
.#$ .#6
Note. !ntries are partial correlations with age controlled. ∗ p .#$. ∗∗ p .#1. ∗∗∗ p .##1.
Table 8K are partial correlations that control for age and thus indicate, for each se, the significance of the relation of the gender identity measure to the ad*ust ment measure with age controlled. The significance of the partial correlation is identical to the significance that would be obtained on the second step of a multi ple regression analysis (conducted on either the boys' data alone or the girls' data alone) in which the ad *ustment inde is treated as the dependent variable, age is entered as a firststep predictor, and the gender identity variable is tested on the second step. =esults concerning the relations between gender identity and ad*ustment are summari5ed net, with each gender identity measure considered in turn.6 1ender 4 ypi!lity
;s may be seen in the first two columns of Table 8K, both boys and girls who perceive themselves to be different from others of their se are distressed. Aot only do their peers perceive them to possess in ternali5ing problems, but the children themselves re port distress, especially dissatisfaction with their so cial lives. 8t was hypothesi5ed that the internali5ed distress of children who feel gender atypical would be great est if the children also felt strong pressure for gender conformity. To test this hypothesis, three regression analyses were runHone for each measure of distress (internali5ing problems, global selfworth, and self perceived peer social competence). 7e and age were 6
7ignificant interactions involving participant age were few, did not ualify the ma*or findings of the study, and conformed to no particular pattern. That is, certain effects described ahead were somewhat stronger for younger children, whereas other effects were somewhat stronger for older children. 4ecause we did not advance predictions about moderator effects of age, and to save space, interactions involving age are not described in this report.
entered on the first step+ on the second step, gen der typicality and felt pressure were entered+ on the third step, the 3 twoway interactions of se × gen der typicality, se × felt pressure, and gender typical ity × felt pressure were evaluated+ on the fourth step, the threeway interaction of se × gender typical ity × felt pressure was tested. 8nteractions involving age were not included, because including them would have resulted in testing more terms than warranted by the N . Jf particular interest was the significance of the gender typicality × felt pressure interaction when tested on the third step. This was significant ( p .#1) only in the analysis on internali5ing problems (in no analysis was the threeway interaction significant). Be eplored the nature of the twoway interaction of felt pressure and gender typicality using the pro cedures recommended by ;ien and Best (1--1). =esults confirmed that the si5e of the negative as sociation between gender typicality and internali5 ing problems was a direct function of the degree to which children reported pressure for gender confor mity. ;s the level of felt pressure moved from low (−1 S) to medium (# S) to high (+1 S), gender typicality became increasingly associated (negatively) with internali5ing problems, respective 5s = −.2%, p .#$+ −.%6, p .##1+ and −.-, p .##1. Thus, as felt pressure increased, selfperceived gender atypi cality became increasingly paired with internali5ing problems. 8t was hypothesi5ed that during middle childhood selfperceptions of agentic traits and of communal traits contribute, respectively, to a sense of male typ icality or female typicality. Consistent with this e pectation, the relation of agentic traits to gender typ icality was indeed significant only for boys, whereas communal traits was significantly related to gender typicality only for girls (Table 8K).
1ender &ontentedness ender contentedness was positively associated with the two selfreported measures of selfesteem for both boys and girls (Table 8K). 8t might ap pear from Table 8K that gender contentedness is unrelated to peerreported internali5ing problems, but it will be recalled that the relation of gender contentedness to internali5ed distress was epected mainly for children who eperience strong pressure for gender conformity (because felt pressure should cause genderdysphoric children the most distress). To eamine this hypothesis, three regression analyses (one for each of the three measures of internali5ed distress) were run (the regression analysis was similar in form to that used to test the hypothesis that felt pressure and gender typicality interactively influence distress). The interaction of gender contentedness and felt pressure was indeed significant for all three depen dent variables (internali5ing problems, p .#1+ global selfworth, p .##$+ and selfperceived peer social competence, p .#1), and this interaction did not de pend on child se (because in no analysis was the threeway interaction of se × gender contented ness × felt pressure significant). =esults from follow up tests using ;ien and Best's procedures (;ien and Best, 1--1) confirmed that the degree to which low gender contentedness was associated with signs of distress was a direct function of the degree of felt pressure. ;s felt pressure moved from low (−1 S) to medium (# S) to high (+1 S), low gender content edness became increasingly associated with distress& for internali5ing problems, respective 5s .#$, ns+ −.33, p .#1+ and −.1, p .#1+ for global selfworth, respective 5s = .31, p .#1+ .$/, p .##1+ and ./$, p .##1+ and for selfperceived peer social compe tence, respective 5s = .1-, p .#$+ .%/, p .##1+ and .6/, p .##1. ;n unepected finding was that gender content edness was significantly related to eternali5ing prob lems for girls (but not for boys). That is, gender dysphoric girls were perceived by peers as more ag gressive, disruptive, and antisocial than other girls.
related to both global selfworth and selfperceived peer social competence, but this was true only for girls (Table 8K)./ 8n addition, the hypothesis that felt pressure leads children to shun positive crossse attributes re ceived support. irls high in felt pressure were low in agentic traits, and boys high in felt pressure were low in communal traits (Table 8K). ;lthough the interaction of felt pressure and se was significant when predicting eternali5ing prob lems, for neither se alone was the association be tween felt pressure and eternali5ing problems signif icant. Aonetheless, the pattern shown in Table 8K (felt pressure and eternali5ing problems are positively correlated for boys but negatively correlated for girls) is consistent with the possibility that felt pressure contributes to the commonly found se difference in eternali5ing conduct. -
-ntergroup 5i!s
There were no significant associations between intergroup bias and the ad*ustment indees (see Table 8K).
Su++!ry !nd Supple+ent!ry An!lyses
!ach of three components of gender identity (gender typicality, gender contentedness, and felt pressure) was associated with at least one peer reported inde of ad*ustment for one or both sees.
= −
6elt ressure
;s noted, felt pressure was a powerful modera tor of the association between internali5ed distress and gender contentedness (and gender typicality). :elt pressure also was, as a main effect, negatively
/
8t will be recalled that the omnibus multiple regression analysis predicting global selfworth from felt pressure (and se and age) yielded a nearly significant ( p .#-) interaction of felt pressure × se. This interaction contributed to our decision to eamine rela tions between the gender identity measures and the ad*ustment variables separately for each se. owever, there is another way to eamine the interactive influence of felt pressure and se on global selfworth. This is to test the significance of the se differ ence in global selfworth at each of several levels (e.g., −1 S/, # S, and +1 S) of felt pressure. Bhen this is done, there is a significant ( p .#$) se difference in global selfworth, with boys scoring higher than girls, only when felt pressure is high. This find ing may be important. 8t is nown that in early adolescence girls begin to score lower on global selfworth than boys (arter, 1--/). The present result raises the possibility that it is predominantly children wh o feel strong pressure for gender conformity who are contributing to the se difference in selfesteem. 8ndeed, when the significance of the se difference in eternali5ing problems is tested at each of three levels ( −1 S, # S, and +1 S ) of felt pressure, a significant se difference, with boys scoring higher than girls, is found only when felt pressure is high ( p . #$).
oreover, for each se, any given peerreported ad *ustment inde was associated with no more than one gender identity measure. :or boys, internali5ing prob lems were associated only with low gender typicality+ eternali5ing problems were not associated with any gender identity measure+ agentic traits were lined only with high gender typicality+ and communal traits were tied only to high felt pressure. :or girls, internal i5ing problems were associated only with low gender typicality+ eternali5ing problems, only with low gen der contentedness+ agentic traits, only with high felt pressure+ and communal traits, only with high gender typicality. ost of these findings were predicted (all ecept the lin for girls between eternali5ing conduct and gender contentedness). ;ssociations between the gender identity mea sures and the selfreported ad*ustment indees, how ever, were more numerous (see Table 8K). 4ecause certain of the gender identity measures were corre lated with one another (Table 88), for each se a mul tiple regression analysis was run on each selfesteem measure in which all four gender identity measures were entered as simultaneous predictors (with age controlled). This strategy permits assessing the sig nificance of each gender identity variable with the ef fects of the other three controlled. :or boys, global selfworth was significantly predicted only by gender contentedness ( pr = .21, p .#$), and selfperceived peer social competence was predicted only by gen der typicality ( pr = .%3, p .##1). :or girls, however , two gender identity measures made independent con tributions to each measure of selfesteem& gender con tentedness and felt pressure were both independent predictors of global selfworth ( pr = .3%, p .##1 and pr = −.2-, p .##2, respectively), and gender typi cality and felt pressure both independently predicted selfperceived peer social competence ( pr = .%$, p 0 .##1 and pr = −.3#, p .##2, respectively). Collec tively, then, the gender identity variables accounted for considerably more of the variance in the self esteem measures for girls than for boys.
!I&C0&&I%*
The results go beyond the findings of !gan and "erry (2##1) by demonstrating that epected rela tionships eist between the gender identity measures and specific social behaviors ehibited in peer interac tion. Three of the four gender identity measures (gen der typicality, gender contentedness, and felt pres sure for gender conformity) bore discriminated and
conceptually meaningful relations with one or more of the indees of psychosocial ad*ustment. 4ecause gender identity was selfreported and social behav ior was peerreported, these associations cannot be attributed to shared method variance. These results strengthen the construct and discriminant validity of the gender identity constructs (and scales) and indi cate that longitudinal wor designed to reveal liely directions of causal influence would be a worthwhile net research step. 4elow we briefly highlight the sig nificance of the main findings for each gender identity construct.
Gender +y1icality
The hypothesis that perceiving the self to be a typical member of the samese peer group is im portant to the psychological wellbeing of preadoles cent children was strongly supported. Children who reported feeling different from samese peers not only voiced distress over their peer relations but in deed were perceived by peers as depressed, anious, selfdeprecating, and victimi5ed. The association be tween low gender typicality and internali5ed distress was magnified when children reported strong pres sure for gender conformity, but it was still evident for children who reported relatively little felt pressure. These results challenge the view that it is harmful for children to view themselves as strongly gender typical. The belief that a perception of the self as strongly gendertypical is harmful is probably rooted in the mistaen assumption that a perception of the self as gendertypical necessarily reflects strong inter nali5ed, selflimiting social pressure for gender con formity (4em, 1-/1). The present data (as well as the data of !gan D "erry, 2##1) indicate not only that gender typicality and felt pressure are uncorre lated but also that these two components of gender identity relate to ad*ustment in opposite ways+ high gender typicality is associated with favorable ad*ust ment, and high felt pressure is associated with nega tive outcomes. Consistent with epectation, gender typicality was positively associated with agentic traits for boys and with communal traits for girls. ;lthough this pat tern supports the view that a sense of gender typi cality rests in part on the selfperception of salient genderlined attributes, longitudinal wor is needed to determine whether genderlined personality traits actually help shape feelings of gender typicality over time.
2elt Pressur e
;s pointed out above, the present results rein force the conclusion of !gan and "erry (2##1) that the real culprit where gender identity is concerned is not the sense that one is similar to samese oth ers but rather the sense that one must avoid cross gendertyped activities. armful effects of felt pres sure for gender conformity were evident in three ways. :irst, for both sees, strong felt pressure appeared to pathologi5e a low sense of gender typicality (and a low sense of gender contentedness), because the associa tion between low gender typicality (and low gender contentedness) and internali5ing problems was con siderably stronger for children who reported high felt pressure than for children who placed less emphasis on gender conformity. 7econd, felt pressure bore a direct negative relation with selfesteem, at least for girls. 8t is liely that felt pressure causes girls to veer away from masculine typed activities and behaviors (e.g., assertion, ris taing) that bring prestige, ecite ment, and self efficacy for coping with challenge and stress (4ussey D 4andura, 1---). Third, and consis tent with the foregoing point, felt pressure was as sociated with reduced agentic behavior for girls and with reduced communal behavior for boys. These re sults suggest that felt pressure for gender conformity is potentially a damaging force in children's (espe cially girls') lives, at least in largely !uropean ;mer ican and middleclass populations of the sort stud ied here. ?ongitudinal wor designed to corroborate that felt pressure predicts deterioration in selected aspects of children's ad*ustment over time is clearly warranted. ;nother crucial tas for future research is to identify the determinants of felt pressure for gender conformity. 7everal possibilities come to mind. :irst, general developmental delay may cause some chil dren to be slow to outgrow the strong felt pressure that is normative during the preschool years. 7econd, so ciali5ing agents (e.g., parents) may place pressure for gender typing on some children, which causes them to intro*ect the sanctions. owever, it is important to appreciate that the felt pressure measure is a unifacto rial scale that taps felt pressure from diverse sources (parents, peers, and self+ !gan D "erry, 2##1). This suggests that felt pressure does not necessarily mir ror specific social learning eperiences but rather is a cognitive construction Ethat goes beyond the dataG to tae the form of a widely generali5ed rule about the inappropriateness of engaging in crossgender typed behavior. Third, adverse eperiences in the peer
group, such as re*ection or victimi5ation by peers, may cause children to search for ways to fit in+ some chil dren may conclude that adhering more stringently to gender roles is the answer . Gender Contentedness
Two findings with the gender contentedness vari able are worth note. :irst, gender contentedness was a robust predictor of global selfworth (when all four gender identity measures were entered as simulta neous predictors). ; sense of not being at home in one's body or a strong wish to engage in the activi ties, interpersonal roles, or even the nonverbal stylistic behaviors (e.g., modes of speech, gesture, and dress) associated with the other se apparently is uniuely depressing to children (and especially so if they feel strong pressure for gender conformity). ; second noteworthy finding concerning gender contentedness was that genderdysphoric girls were named by peers as more aggressive, disruptive, and ar gumentative (i.e., as having more eternali5ing prob lems) than other girls. 8t is unclear whether the girls' aggression is a reaction to dissatisfaction with being a girl or whether gender discontentment is a rational i5ation by aggressive girls (E8f only 8 were a boy, it would be oay for me to act lie this.G). 8f this finding replicates in subseuent research, it will be important to untangle the direction of causality. Interrou1 3ias
8ntergroup bias was unrelated to any ad*ustment inde. !gan and "erry (2##1) found signs of poorer ad*ustment (i.e., lower selfperceived peer social com petence and less acceptance by male peers) for chil dren who epressed the belief that their se was su perior to the other, but there was no evidence in the present study that ingroup favoritism was dis advantageous to ad*ustment. ;lthough ingroup fa voritism may not be reliably lined directly with the indees of ad*ustment studied here, it may serve as an important moderator of the effects of certain contetual cues on children's functioning. :or e ample, children with strong intergroup bias may be less liely to cooperate, or more liely to compete, with otherse peers, or they may have more diffi culty resolving conflicts or forming intimate relations with otherse persons (4igler, 1--$+ "owlishta, 1--$). These possibilities might be eplored in subseuent research.
Conclusions
This study yielded a rich set of theoretically meaningful and discriminated relations between the components of gender identity and multiple indees of personal and social ad*ustment within the peer group. any of the relations suggest the operation of causal processes that, if confirmed in subseuent longitudinal research, are of consider able social significance. The potentially deleterious effects of felt pressure for gender conformity on preadolescent girls' selfesteem and agentic compe tencies is especially a matter for concern. owever , until the necessary longitudinal wor is conducted, it is important not to assume the operation of any specific causal process. The results of the present investigation indicate only that longitudinal wor on causal processes is warranted, not that the putative causal processes are indeed responsible for the associations. 4elow we briefly restate the value of a multi dimensional model of gender identity and tell how the results support such a model. Be then com ment on how the present multidimensional per spective fits with other influential perspectives on gender . ; multidimensional approach to gender iden tity is valuable because it draws attention to the fact that gender identity development does not reduce to the unfolding of a single entity but rather involves the development of several component entities. 7ome of these components are more normative at certain developmental periods than at others. ;s early as middle childhood, healthy gender identity develop ment entails a rebalancing actHletting go of develop mentally immature forms of gender identity (i.e., felt pressure for gender conformity and intergroup bias), consolidating one's contentment gender assignment, with one's and grappling successfully with the chal lenges posed by the newly emerging ability and urge to compare oneself with samese others on gender typical attributes (i.e., perceiving sufficient gender typed ualities in the comfortably gen der self to feel typical). oreover, how certain gender identity components are configured relative to one another in the child's psyche carries important implications for mental health+ the combination of high felt pressure and low felt gender typicality (or low gender content edness) is particularly problematic for children's psy chological wellbeing . The data of the present study support ey points of the foregoing analysis. 9uring the preadolescent
age period studied, intergroup bias and felt pres sure for gender conformityHnormative components of gender identity in earlier yearsHdecreased with age, whereas gender typicality and gender contented ness increased with age. ost of these components of gender identity (all ecept intergroup bias) were dif ferentially associated in theoretically epected ways not only with selfesteem but also with peer re ports of specific modes of adaptation within the peer group. :or the past uarter century, theory and research that lin gender identity to ad*ustment have been dominated by androgyny theory, or the notion that mental health is promoted by a perception of the self as both masculine and feminine (e.g., 4em, 1-/1). Conceptual and methodological problems have char acteri5ed this approach, however. These problems have been reviewed etensively by !gan and "erry (2##1) and by 7pence (1-/$, 1--3+ 7pence D 4ucner, 1--$) and will not be reiterated here. Aonetheless, it is worthwhile to underscore briefly several cen tral differences between the androgyny approach and the present one. :irst, the androgyny perspective re gards an overall sense of samegender typicality as orthogonal to an overall sense of othergender typi cality. :or reasons discussed by !gan and "erry (2##1, pp. %#O%1), it is unliely that the two summary senses of same and othergender typicality are or thogonal dimensions+ it is more liely that they func tion as opposite ends of a single continuum (e.g., with a strong sense of othergender typicality implying re duced samegender typicality). 8t is for this reason that !gan and "erry developed only a single, uni dimensional measure of gender typicality. 7econd, androgyny researchers believe that it is possible to infer an individual's overall senses of same and other gender typicality (e.g., a boy's felt EmasculinityG and EfemininityG) from selfperceptions in a single do main of se typing, namely, personality traits. That is, selfperceived agentic traits presumably inde one's overall felt masculinity, and selfperceptions of com munal traits presumably inde one's overall felt femi ninity. 8n contrast, in the present approach, children' s selfperceived overall gender typicality reflects an id iosyncratic integration of diverse information about one's gender typing in multiple domains (e.g., one child may assign great weight to selfperceived non verbal stylistic ualities but only little weight to self perceived agentic or communal traits, whereas an other child may employ a different calculus). Thus, in the present approach, gender typicality is assessed in a global summary sense, not in terms of selfperception
Print document
In order to print this document from Scribd, you'll 1# of any specific aspect of gender Third, in it. the view that feeling gender typical is salutary rather than firsttyping. need to download androgyny approach, felt pressure for gender confor harmful, at least among children of the ages studied mity is believed to be inferable from the degree of bal here. ance between one's overall felt masculinity s 8n recent Cancel and one' Download And Print years, a trend in the study of gender ef overall felt femininity, and therefore there is no need fects in social cognition and social behavior has been to measure felt pressure independently of felt gender a focus on contetual influences (9eau D ?a:rance , typicality. 8n other words, it is assumed that people 1--/+ 9eau D a*or, 1-/6+ accoby, 1--/). :or e who perceive themselves as highly samese typical ample, the se of one's interaction partner(s), such as (and as low otherse typical) are the way they are the ratio of boys to girls in a play group or the ratio of because they are eperiencing high felt pressure. 4e men to women in a wor place, is a ma*or influence cause of this reasoning, androgyny researchers on genderrelevant cognitions and action tendencies. predict that persons high in gender typicality will be The study of contet effects is sometimes presented disadvan taged in developmentHthey presumably as an approach to researching gender that is alter are eperi encing the high felt pressure for gender native to an approach that rests on the appreciation conformity that straight*acets healthy development of individual differences in gender identity. owever , of self. 8n the present perspective, there is no advances in understanding gender are liely to derive necessary rela tion between selfperceived gender from researching contetual and identity factors con typicality and felt pressure for gender conformity, *ointly rather than separately. There are various ways and thus it is clearly important to assess felt pressure that contet and identity might wor together to af and gender typicality using different measures. fect behavior. ender identity might affect the con oreover, gender typicality and felt pressure are tets that children choose or create for themselves. believed to have opposite effects on mental health. ender identity might also mediate or, more liely , 9espite their profound differences in concep moderate contetual influences on children's behav tual assumptions and research methodologies, both ior. :or eample, gender typicality might moderate the androgyny perspective and the present one share children's tendencies to imitate, or to infer their self an important predictionHthat felt pressure for gen efficacy from, models of a particular se+ gender con der conformity is harmful, especially for girls. This tentedness or felt pressure might govern children' s hypothesis has now received preliminary (concurrent willingness to perform rewarding crossgender op correlational) support from two studies that have used tions when pitted against lowerpaying samegender a separate direct measure of felt pressureHthe !gan options+ intergroup bias might predict the degree and "erry (2##1) study and the present one. owever , to which children engage in uncooperative or hos confirmation of the hypothesis that felt pressure pro tile interactions with otherse persons or groups. 8t motes malad*ustmentHa hypothesis that originated is also possible that combinations of gender iden with androgyny theoryHdoes not imply confirma tity components govern reactions to contetual cues. tion of the androgyny theorists' companion hypothe :or eample, boys and men who eperience high sis that perceiving the self to be strongly gender typi felt pressure for gender conformity along with high cal is also harmful. =esults of the !gan and "erry and intergroup bias might be especially prone to have present studies in fact are more consistent with the hostile reactions to ambiguous provocations by girls and women, thereby encouraging abuse of female interaction partners (Capaldi, 9ishion, 7toolmiller , 1# The fact that selfperceived agentic traits are relatively uncorre D Loerger, 2##1). Thus, the study of contet and lated with selfperceived communal traits encouraged androgyny the study of gender identity should proceed hand in researchers to view overall samese typicality and overall other hand. se typicality as orthogonal dimensions. owever, for many do mains of gender typing other than personality traits, maletypical behavior and femaletypical behavior may be strongly negatively correlated rather than orthogonal. :or eample, among adults a preference for female se partners (maletypical seual orienta tion) and a preference for male se partners (femaletypical se ual orientation) tend to be strongly negatively correlated rather than uncorrelated. 8n any case, for reasons summari5ed by !gan and "erry (2##1), selfperceptions of overall samegender typi cality and of overall othergender typicality are more liely to be negatively related than to be orthogonal.
AC"*%$L#!GM#*+&
Be than the teachers and students of the ;. 9. enderson
Print document R#2#R#*C#&
In order to print this document from Scribd, you'll first need to download it.0agan, I. (1-%). ;cuisition
;ien, ?. 7., D Best, 7. . (1--1). Multiple regression7 esting !nd interpreting inter!tions. Aewbury "ar, C;& 7age. Cancel 4em, 7. ?. (1-/1). ender schema theory& ; cognitive account of se typing. sy)ologi!l Re*ie(, 88, 3$%O3%. 4em, 7. ?. (1--3). )e lenses o" gender7 4r!ns"or+ing t)e de#!te on sexu!l ineu!lity. Aew aven, CT& Lale o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3. So% i!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent ($th ed., pp. 3/-O %2). Aew Lor& Biley. 4ussey, 0., D 4andura, ;. (1---). 7ocial cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. sy)ologi!l Re*ie(, ?0: , 6O613. Capaldi, 9. ., 9ishion, T. I., 7toolmiller, ., D Loerger, 0. (2##1). ;ggression toward a female partner by atris young men& The contribution of male adolescent friendships. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 3@ , 1O63. Caporael, ?. =., D 4rewer, . 4. (1--1). The uest for human nature& 7ocial and scientific issues in evolutionary psychology. ;ourn!l o" Soi!l -ssues , 4@ , 1O-. 9eau, 0., D ?a:rance, . (1--/). ender. 8n 9. T. ilbert, 7. T. :ise, D . ?ind5ey (!ds.), =!nd#oo> o" soi!l psyology (Kol. 1, pp. 6//O/26). Aew Lor& crawill. 9eau, 0., D a*or, 4. (1-/6). "utting gender into contet& ;n interactive model of genderrelated behavior. syologi!l Re*ie(, 94, 3-O3/-. !gan, 7. 0., D "erry, 9. . (1--/). 9oes low selfregard invite victimi5ationF /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 34, 2--O3#-. !gan, 7. 0., D "erry, 9. . (2##1). ender identity& ; multidimen sional analysis with implications for psychosocial ad*ustment. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 3@ , %$1O%3. reen, =. (1-6%). Sexu!l identity on"lit in )ildren !nd !dults. Aew Lor& 4asic 4oos. reen, =. (1-/6). )e Asissy #oy syndro+eB !nd t)e de*elop+ent o" o+osexu!lity. Aew aven, CT& Lale o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3. Soi!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent (pp. $$3O 16). Aew Lor& Biley. odges, !. K. !., alone, . I., D "erry, 9. . (1--6). 8ndividual ris and social ris as interacting determinants of victimi5a tion in the peer group. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 33, 1#32O 1#3-. odges, !. K. !., D "erry, 9. . (1---). "ersonal and interper sonal antecedents and conseuences of victimi5ation by peers. ;ourn!l o" erson!lity !nd Soi!l sy)ology, @: , 66O/$. uston, ;. C. (1-/3). 7etyping. 8n !. . etherington (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 4. Soi!li!tion, person!l% ity, !nd soi!l de*elop+ent (%th ed., pp. 3//O%6). Aew Lor& Biley.
and significance of se typing and se role identity. 8n . ?. offman D ?. B. offman (!ds.), Re*ie( o" )ild de*elop+ent rese!r) (Kol. 1, pp. 136O1/). Aew L or& =ussell 7age. 0ohlberg, (1-). ; cognitivedevelopmental analysis of chil Download?.And Print dren's serole concepts and attitudes. 8n !. !. accoby (!d.), )e de*elop+ent o" sex di""erenes (pp. /2O163). 7tanford, C;& 7tanford o" soi!li!tion t)eory !nd rese!r) (pp. 3%6O3/#). 7oie, 8?& =and cAally. accoby, !. !. (1--/). )e t(o sexes7 1ro(ing up !p!rt, o+ing toget)er . Cambridge, ;& arvard o" lini!l #e)!*ior ter!p y (it) )ildren (pp. $/O--). omewood, 8?& 9orsey "ress. =uble, 9. A., D artin, C. ?. (1--/). ender development. 8n A. !isenberg (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3. Soi!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent (pp. -33O 1#1). Aew Lor& Biley. 7laby, =. ., D :rey, 0. 7. (1-6$). 9evelopment of gender con stancy and selective attention to samese models. &)ild /e% *elop+ent , 4: , /%-O/$. 7pence, I. T. (1-/$). ender identity and implications for concepts of masculinity and femininity. 8n T. 4. 7onderegger (!d.), Ne#r!s>! sy+posiu+ on +oti*!tion7 sy)ology !nd gender (Kol. 32, pp. $-O-). ?incoln, A!&