Cognitive Explanations - Kohlberg's Theory

Question 1

Kohlberg developed his theory according to Piaget’s theory

Answer 1

of cognitive development, where he argued that very young children lack conservation skills, making it difficult for them to make the distinction between how something looks and reality.

Question 2

The way we think changes as we get older.

Answer 2

This is due to physical changes in the brain.
The brain becomes capable of increasingly complicated thinking. Therefore, changes in understanding of gender are the outcome of age-related changes.
Development of gender (identity and understanding) occurs in stages, children gradually progress as their way of thinking matures.

Question 3

Gender Constancy Theory (Kohlberg, 1966)

Answer 3

In Kohlberg’s cognitive-developmental perspective, a stable gender identity must precede (come before) the development of gender-role behaviour, therefore children do not learn to behave in gender-appropriate ways until about the age of 6 or 7.

It is at this age, when conservation skills have developed (the ability to recognise that the properties of an object remain the same despite changes in its physical appearance), that children acquire gender constancy – the belief that their own gender is fixed and irreversible.

Once children achieve gender constancy, they consistently think of themselves as male or female and begin modelling the behaviour of members of their own sex.

Question 4

Kohlberg argued that children progress through a series of stages

Answer 4

and that their progress is dependent on brain maturation, as their cognitive capabilities develop.

Question 5

Stage 1: Gender Identity / Labelling (18 months – 3 years)

Answer 5

Children can identify themselves as male or female, based purely on external appearances e.g. how an individual is dressed.
Children will change the gender label if outward appearance changes e.g. ‘he has long hair so he must be a girl now’.

Question 6

Stage 2: Gender Stability (3 – 5 years)

Answer 6

Children understand that gender is consistent over time i.e. that they will grow up to be a mummy or daddy.
However, they can’t recognise that gender is consistent across situations. They still use superficial, physical signs to determine gender e.g. they may think that if a male engages in a female activity, (e.g. playing with dolls) it may cause him to become female.

Question 7

Stage 3: Gender Constancy / Consistency (6+ years)

Answer 7

Children understand that gender is constant over time and situations, despite changes in appearance. Children then begin to develop an understanding of gender-appropriate behaviours and pay attention to same-sex role models.
At this age children start to identify with adult figures possessing the qualities that are seen as relevant to their own gender, and they start imitating same-sex models and following sex appropriate activities.

Question 8

Kohlberg (1966) tested his theory by

Answer 8

providing children with pictures and asking if gender would alter with changes to characteristics such as hair or clothes.
He found that it was only at about 5 years that children recognised the constancy of gender, therefore adding support to his ideas.

Question 9

Cross-cultural similarities (Munroe et al., 1984)

Answer 9

) in the sequence of development of the gender concept (identity -> stability -> constancy) reinforces the idea that brain maturation is more important than different social experiences, therefore adding support to Kohlberg’s theory that gender development is determined by cognitive-developmental factors.

Question 10

Gender Identity/Labelling

Answer 10

Slaby and Frey (1975) showed pictures of a young boy and girl to children and asked “Which one are you?”. Children over the age of 2 could give an appropriate response and pointed at the correct picture.

Thompson (1975) - three year olds were 14% more accurate than two year olds in identifying their sex.

Question 11

Gender Stability (3.5 – 6 years)

Answer 11

Slaby and Frey (1975) studied children’s responses to various questions to assess their understanding of gender e.g. “When you grow up, will you be a mummy or daddy?” – it wasn’t until 3/4 years that they were able to successfully answer these questions.
McConaghy (1979) found that if a doll was dressed in transparent clothing so its genitals were visible, children of 3-5 years judged its gender by its clothes, not its genitals, supporting Kohlberg’s belief that children of this age use superficial physical indicators to determine gender.

Question 12

Gender Consistency (6+ years)

Answer 12

Slaby and Frey (1975) – “Could you be a girl/boy if you wanted to?”; “If you played football, would you be a boy or a girl?”- older children paid greater attention to same-sex models around the age of 6 years.

Question 13

Slaby and Frey also assessed

Answer 13

the value of gender constancy, showing children a film in which men appeared on the left and women on the right.
Those children high in gender constancy showed greatest interest in same-sex models (as indicated by the side they looked at most often).
This suggests, as Kohlberg predicted, that an increasing sense of constancy leads children to pay more attention to gender-appropriate models.

Question 14

Age discrepancies may be due to the methods used to test the children’s understanding e.g. whether drawings or photographs are used.

Answer 14

Emmerlich et al. (1977) showed pre-school children drawings where gender-inappropriate changes in hairstyle or dress had been made. Very few of them were able to recognise that gender remains the same despite the changes.
However, if they were shown photographs of real children, first in the nude with sexual anatomy visible, and then dressed in gender-inappropriate clothing, 40% of the 3-5 year olds knew that the child’s gender had not changed (Bem, 1989).

Question 15

Bem argued that

Answer 15

younger children fail at this task because they don’t know what opposite sex genitalia looks like. When younger children were tested, 77% also failed a genital knowledge test.

Question 16

Evaluating Kohlberg’s theory - Strengths

Answer 16

The cognitive approach to gender development has made a significant contribution to our understanding of how thinking about gender changes over time.
It recognises how brain maturation affects cognitive capabilities, linking closely with Piaget’s ideas, which have been tested extensively.

There is research to support the concepts of gender identity, stability and constancy and their order e.g. Slaby and Frey; Munroe et al. (1984).

Question 17

Evaluating Kohlberg’s theory - Limitations

Answer 17

Kohlberg’s theory mainly describes the processes rather than explains them, therefore lacking explanatory power.
Kohlberg’s stages, for example, tell us how children are likely to think at different ages but relatively little about why gender thinking changes in this way.
E.g. studies can tell us that seven year olds think differently from four year-olds but do not allow us not make causal inferences about why.
Gender Differences: Slaby and Frey also found that boys tended to exhibit gender constancy before girls and Huston (1985) points out that it is relatively easy to get girls to take on masculine type activities, but the same cannot be said of boys who generally resist.
This difference can be explained in terms of Social Learning Theory.
Boys may be more likely to be punished for gender inappropriate behaviour, so learn appropriate gender behaviour rapidly, suggesting that social learning theory principles are also involved.

Question 18

EXTRA
Evaluating Kohlberg’s theory - Limitations

Answer 18

Too rigid: Kohlberg’s theory is a stage theory – there is some disagreement about the actual age when changes take place.

Martin and Little’s research suggests that Kohlberg may have underestimated a child’s understanding of gender stereotypes and gender-appropriate behaviour prior to the gender constancy stage.
Martin and Little (1990) found that children under the age of 4 showed no signs of gender stability or gender constancy, but did display strong gender stereotypes about what boys and girls were permitted to do e.g. boys and girls show preferences for stereotypical male and female toys. Children also generally demonstrate gender-appropriate behaviours and reward gender-appropriate behaviours in peers before they have reached gender constancy, challenging Kohlberg’s ideas.
Bussey and Bandura (1992) found that boys and girls aged 4 said they felt “real good” about playing with gender appropriate toys and “real bad” about playing with gender inappropriate ones.
This suggests that children acquire information about gender roles before Kohlberg suggested, in line with the gender schema theory.

Question 19

Issues & Debates

Answer 19

Nature-nurture debate: Although the cognitive approach acknowledges some biological influences (brain maturation) in gender development it has tended to neglect others (genes; hormones). Consequently, there are aspects of gender development that the cognitive approach has difficulty explaining.
For example, most studies have found that boys’ thinking about gender is more rigid than girls’ but this is difficult to account for in the cognitive approach.

Nature-nurture debate: The cognitive approach may underestimate or neglect the role of external influences on the child’s development e.g. social influences – role of punishment; powerful role models for boys.

Deterministic: Kohlberg assumes that understanding of gender is predominantly determined by brain maturation.