cognitive explanations Flashcards
Cognitive explanations AO1
The cognitive developmental approach focuses on how a child’s understanding of gender develops qualitatively over time. Gender identity is seen to result from children actively structuring their own experiences, rather than being a passive outcome of social learning. Different gender behavior therefore reflects how children understand and think about gender. These changes reflect a) the accumulation of information gathered from the environment and b) the maturation of the child’s brain which allows more sophisticated processing of information.
KOHLBERG cognitive developmental theory
The basic principle of Kohlberg’s theory is that a child’s understanding of gender develops with age (due to maturation). As part of the theory, Kohlberg identified three stages in gender development: gender identity; gender stability; and gender constancy.
Structuralist approach
Suggests suggest so suggest gender development is driven primarily due to brain maturation. A child’s brain development and growth limits the complexity of thought that they are capable of at certain ages. At the same time as maturation is taking place the child receives information from their environment about gender. As maturation limits gender development, K believed his stages were universal, i.e. found in all cultures
What is meant by structuralism
The methodology that elements of human culture must be understood in terms of their relationship to a larger overarching system (schemas) or structure works to I’d cover the structures that underlie all the things humans do, think, feel and proceed
Outline KOHLBERG’s three stages
Gender identity
2 to 3.5 y/o
Label themselves by gender but believe it could be changed based on superficial characteristics
Gender stability
3.5 to 4.5 y/o
Sex is stable over time but not across different situations
E.g. If you wear a dress you are a girl
genda consistency
4.5 to 7 y/o
Sex is constant overtime and situation
K cultural diffs?
Munroe – the concepts of gender identity, stability and constancy occur in that order across many cultures including Kenya, Belize, Samoa and Nepal
Support kohlberg’s suggestion gender stages are universal as it seen across cultures, thus suggest an innate tendency
But can’t explain some individual differences
Can’t explain why some more sex type than others
Does not explain why children take on unusual gender identities
FOGOT
Compare and 27 egalitarian families with 42 traditional families. Interviewed and observed parents playing with children. At age 4 children were given a gender labelling task which shows children in traditional families tend to use gender labels earlier and showed more gender role stereotyping than those in egalitarian families.TS not just stages, but dependent on environmental factors
Issues with testing children- Young kids Ltd in vocalising their feelings, lack of communication skills, and can’t articulate and express therefore does not actually reflect child understanding of gender. Lacks validity
Research against kohlberg’s theory
Bussey and Bandura (1992) Children begin to demonstrate gender-appropriate behaviour before gender constancy is achieved. Children as young as 4 reported ‘feeling good’ with gender appropriate toys and ‘feeling bad’ about doing the opposite.
K suggested is not until they reached gender constancy that children start actively processing gender information by seeking out in copying sex type behaviour this study contrast this idea as kids demonstrate this earlier on
Suggest roles of external factors such as rewards and reinforcing in the environment which K stages do not account for. Therefore this undermines K theory but the gender schema theory as children begin to talk gender appropriate material as soon as they identify as male or female
Nature nurture colberg
Gender runs parallel to brain maturation, at This idea of imitation is more nurture. Gender constancy children seek out role models to imitate which connects closely to SLT ( though SLT theorists argue this happened at any stage) understanding gender runs parallel to intellectual development as the child biologically mature, so this is in line with the biological viewpoint as stages are influenced by the child developing brain
Supported by Monroe that concept of gender identity our universal
Holistic approach as combined SLT with biological factors
Gender schema model
Martin + Halverson
Gender schema theory suggests that as soon as the child is able to label themselves boy or girl they start actively looking to the environment in order to build an increasingly rich and complex schema about their gender. They allow children to organise + structure info and to learn about which toys are appropriate for each gender and which clothes are appropriate.
Martin and Halverson describe two types of sex-related schemas: in-group schemas (the group with which a person identifies); and out-group schemas (the opposite group). Once a child has identified with their in-group, they begin to positively evaluate their own group and negatively evaluate the out-group. Children then begin to ignore any information that is not consistent with their in-group schema and this means that gender schemas have very strong effects on what children remember and how they perceive the world. As the child’s gender schema develops they also start to develop gender scripts, these are sex type sequences of activities that boys and girls carried out
Key differences between gender schema theory and Colberg
Imitate and gender stereotype
GST - age 2
K - age 4-7
K claims there is no gender behaviour until they have reached constancy, BEM suggests much earlier
GST eval
Should be able to change their behaviour by changing their schema. We can change schema but this doesn’t seem to really change the behaviour, e.g. women still do most of the cleaning and childrearing
Based on schemas, and Therefore better able to explain individual differences –> FAGOT
Deterministic, based on schemas which are modelled on our previous experiences, can’t alter what you experience
