Adult perceptions of the infant as a function of gender labeling and observer gender

Pink Or Blue

“…Although there is no way to determine whether or not the attitudes presented in these cards influence parents' perceptions of their newborns, the assumption underlying archival research is that the messages contained in societal artifacts do, at a minimum, reflect societal perceptions. Thus, based on the assumption that the differential treatment of girl and boy infants shown by parents and other adults stems, in part, from differential beliefs about girls and boys (e.g., Condry, Condry, & Pogatshnik, 1983; Delk et al, 1986;Seavey, Katz, & Zalk, 1975;Sidorowicz & Lunney, 1980), the gender stereotypes portrayed by these cards may be indicative of differential behaviors that parents display toward their infant sons and daughters.…”

“…Similarly, there is evidence that manipulation of an infant's gender label produces stereotypic perceptions of the child's emotional reactions (Condry & Condry, 1976) and the femininitylmasculinity of her/his activities (Delk, Madden, Livingston, & Ryan, 1986). Further, several researchers have observed that adults select gender-stereotypic toys when interacting with boy-labeled versus girl-labeled infants (Sidorowicz & Lunney, 1980;Smith & Lloyd, 1978).…”

Prematurity Stereotyping: Absence of Evidence (DRAFT 1.DEC2015)

“…Moreover, subjects' attributes and gender play and important role when perceiving an infant. Condry and Condry (1979) reported when subjects were asked to observe an infant, not only subject's gender and attributed gender to infant counted as predictor of the ratings (Delk et al, 1986), but also previous experiences of the subject with young children mattered (see also Degelman et al, 2009). Since young infants do not provide that much of behavioral signs, it can be expected that biases and stereotypes toward young infants are closely related and mostly rooted in perceivers' view rather than the infant herself.…”

Effects of Real Gender and Labeled Gender on Adults' Perceptions of Infants

“…On the questionnaire for each of these dimensions, the first-named pole was represented by a score of I and the second by a score of 7. On the basis of previous studies, as cited below, the more masculine poles of the dimensions were ass umed to be not sensitive (Bell , 1981 ), intelligent (Gurwitz & Dodge , 1975;Hau gh et al, 1980), not fearful (Condry & Condry, 1976;Haugh et al , 1980), not cuddly (Fagot, 1974 , p. 556 ["hugs and kisses"] ; Meyer & Sobieszek, 1972;Rubin et al, 1974;Haugh et al, 1980, p. 599 ["soft/ hard")) , strong (Meyer & Sobieszek , 1972 , p. 44 ["sturdy"]; Rubin et al, 1974 ["strong" and "hardy")) , a problem (Rubin et al, 1974 , p. 516 ["fussy,' ' "crank y," "unfriendly," "poor eater," "excitable," and "noisy"]) , immature (Maccoby, 1980, p. 210), masculine (Delk et al, 1986;Gurwitz & Dodge , 1975) , active (Goldberg & Lewis , 1972;Meyer & Sobieszek, 1972 ;Rubin et al , 1974;Smith & Daglish , 1977), and playful (Goldberg & Lewis, 1972;Smith & Daglish, 1977). Although the polarity of these dimensions was randomized on the actual questionnaire , for the sake of convenience the results were coded such that higher scores (maximum = 7) represented more "masculine" ratings and lower scores (minimum = I) signified more "feminine" ratings .…”

“…Subjects in these studies have included children (Haugh et al, 1980) , college students (Bell, 1981 ;Condry & Condry, 1976;Gurwitz & Dodge , 1975;Hildebrandt & Fitzgerald, 1979;Holman & Williamson , 1979;Seavey et al, 1975 ;Sidorowicz & Lunney, 1980;Zucker & Corter, 1980) , pregnant women (Bell & Carver, 1980), parents (Bell, 1981;Meyer & Sobieszek , 1972;Rothbart & Maccoby, 1966;Will et al , 1976), and nonparents (Seavey et al, 1975) . Unfortunately, the results have been as varied as the populations from which the subjects were selected (Stem & Karraker, 1989) , with some studies showing no significant effects as a result of labeled gender (Bell & Carver, 1980;Holman & Williamson, 1979;Meyer & Sobieszek , 1972;Zucker & Corter, 1980) and others showing main effects only for rated masculinity and femininity (Delk, Madden , Livingston, & Ryan , 1986;Gurwitz & Dodge , 1975), interactions of labeled sex and other variables (Bell , 1981 ;Gurwitz & Dodge, 1975 ;Meyer & Sobieszek, 1972;Rothbart & Maccoby, 1966) , or main effects on subjects' ratings or other behavior as a function of gender label (Condry & Condry, 1976;Haugh et We are gra teful to Joanne Buczkowska and Sally Andrews for testing subjects in Experiments 2 and 3, respectively; to Jan elle Ah Cann for coding data fo r Experiments 1 and 2; and to Kevin Bird, Richard Harris , and Terry Lewin for their statisa l. , 1980;Hildebrandt & Fitzgerald , 1979;Leone & Robertson , 1989;Seavey et a! , 1975 ;Sidorowicz & Lu...…”