Cognitive explanation of gender development Flashcards
What is Kohlbergs idea on gender development?
- gender identity/roles determined by a child’s level of thinking and understanding as they have the cognitive ability around 7 years of age to understand gender is fixed/constant
- therefore schemas develop of appropriate/inappropriate same sex behaviour/characteristics e.g.hairstyles,personality,clothes etc.
- gender schemas/roles develop through environmental interactions (actively seek out/imitate same sex models) + focus on other gender info on how to behave like boy/girl(self-socialisation)
Name the 3 stages in the development of full gender identity
gender identity (2-3yrs old)-understands that they're a boy/girl but think gender can change gender stability (3-5yrs old)-own gender fixed over time boy=man girl=woman but can't apply to others so can be confused in appearance e.g. man long hair=woman gender constancy (6-7yrs old)-gender remains fixed over time/situations and are cognitively ready to develop appropriate gender roles/behaviour
Pro Kohlberg-supporting evidence
McConaghy 1979-doll in transparent clothes so discrepancy between clothing/genitals, 3-4yr olds decided on dolls gender on basis of clothing showing gender constancy not yet achieved by this age as K predicted.
Munroe et al 1984-K’s 3 stages of gender identity development similar/occurred in same order in 6 cultures including USA,Kenya,Nepal,Belize etc. shows 3 stages universal and based on biological maturation of cognitive structures as Kohlberg claims.
Con Kohlberg-contradictory evidence
Bussey and Bandura-children as young as 4 felt good playing with gender-appropriate toys but bad with gender-inappropriate toys,More in line with GST as it suggests kids absorb gender-appropriate info as soon as they identify as male/female whereas K’s claims are disputed as children clearly don’t only begin to demonstrate gender-appropriate behaviour when they reach gender constancy stage.
Con Kohlberg-methodological issues
interviews included kids as young as 2, even though Q’s were tailored to age group, they could lack the vocabulary needed to express understanding of gender. Lowers the validity of interviews if feelings not truly expressed so also not representative of kid’s understanding of gender also lowering validity of K’s stages.
Con Kohlberg-boys show stronger sex-typing
if gender development due to maturation purely, then no difference should be seen in both forms of gender identity so less flexibility due to socialisation. Found fathers usually react more negatively to son’s feminine play than mums so environmental influences could explain less flexibility and greater resistance to opposite-sex activities so social explanation a better explanation of gender development.
Define gender schema
an organised set of beliefs/expectations about gender which guides gender-appropriate behaviour.
What is the gender schema theory?
gender schemas on appropriate/inappropriate gender behaviour is learnt through observations and interactions with others.It develops from 2yrs of age once basic gender identity established and kids more focused on schemas matching in-group gender identity and avoid out-group schemas.
Describe what in-group schemas are
develops concerning expectations and attitudes about one’s own gender and out-group schemas about the other gender. Provides basis on appropriate/inappropriate gender role behaviour and schemas determine info kids pay attention to,interpretation of social situations and behaviour and what is remembered from experience.
Gender schemas more complex/change as kid’s cognitive abilities develop and become more flexible (kids understand gender roles socially constructed so many teens become less sex-typed/more androgynous)
pro of GST: supporting evidence
Martin and Halverson found children under the age of six were more likely to remember photographs of gender consistent behaviours than gender inconsistent behaviours when tested a week later. Children tended to change the sex of the person carrying out the gender – inconsistent activities in the photographs when asked to recall them which supports that memory is distorted to fit in with existing gender schemas.
Con of GST: assumptions unsupported
Key assumptions are unsupported. The theory suggests that it should be possible to change a child’s schemas and that by adolescence gender schemas become more flexible but this has shown to be very difficult. For example many people have strong views regarding sex equality and division of labour in the home but this often fails to show in their day to day behaviour. Therefore, this demonstrates that attitudes do not necessarily lead to behaviour yet the gender schema theory assumes that child’s attitudes (schemas) do affect their behaviour.
Con of GST: ignores other factors
Criticism of exaggerating the importance of schemas. The theory ignores social factors such as the roles of parental influence and the role of reward and punishment. For example, a girl may be punished for being assertive and dominant whereas a boy may be praised for showing these qualities. Therefore inappropriate to conclude that schemas alone are responsible for gender role development and that other factors should be taken into consideration when trying to explain such a complex behaviour.
Why should GST and Kohlberg’s theory be complementary? (AO3)
Researchers have argued that gender schemas and gender constancy may be two different processes. Gender schemas explain how information is organised and stored in memory whereas gender constancy related to motivation. Once a child has established their concept of what it means to be a boy or girl they are then motivated to find out more. It would therefore perhaps be more appropriate to look to combining these gender theories to provide a wider understanding of gender development.
