Functionalism, Darwinism, and advances in the psychology of women and gender: From the 19th century to the 21st

Shields, Stephanie A.

doi:10.1177/0959353516663567

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is a plausible hypothesis that should be analyzed in depth in future research with more data. It is also possible that women are increasingly comparing to other women and not to men, which may attenuate estimated gender differences in the subjective perception of well-being ( Shields, 2016 ). In this line, Bond and Allen (2016) propose overcoming the binarism (male/female) in gender studies to develop a more multifaceted understanding of gender differences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of Subjective Well-Being Under Different Economic Scenarios

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the evolution of the driving forces that shape individual subjective well-being (SWB) in Spain from 2013 to 2018. Several socio-demographic, material conditions and quality of life (QoL) variables are considered as potential drivers of SWB. The data come from a large survey carried in two different time periods. The first one (2013) is characterized by a negative economic scenario as a result of the global financial crisis of 2008. The second one (2018) is characterized by fast economic recovery. Our results suggest that the material conditions variables, especially unemployment, have a much deeper impact on SWB during economic downturns than during economic recovery periods. Social connections and health status are determinant factors behind SWB, especially if the economy is working well. Our results also point to changes in gender effects. While women were happier than men in 2013, this effect disappears in 2018. Paradoxically, this suggest an increase in female expectations about their own lives during this period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of Subjective Well-Being Under Different Economic Scenarios

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the years since my 1995 article, studies in the tradition of critical feminist history of psychology have continued to illuminate women’s contributions to the discipline (Shields, 2016; Unger & Dottolo, 2016). For example, building on the work of Scarborough and Furumoto (1987) on the “untold lives” of the first generation of women psychologists, Johnston and Johnson (2008) analyzed the lives and careers of the second generation of women psychologists 4 .…”

Section: The View From 25 Years Latermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, such analyses have challenged assumptions about the meritocracy of science, as well as attributions that locate the problem of women’s underrepresentation within individual women themselves. In the words of Shields (2016), . .…”

Section: Intersectionality Neoliberalism and A Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(pp. 398–399) Further, Shields (2016) suggested that intersectionality, or the assertion that multiple, social identities do not function independently of each other, shifts the focus from atomized individual experience to the social systems of stratification that maintain systems of power and privilege, and as such, shape individual psychological experience (see also Rutherford & Milar, 2017). As such, intersectionality may offer a potential lens for viewing women and science from a more nuanced perspective, one that takes into account the connection between individual subjectivities and broader societal structures.…”

Section: Intersectionality Neoliberalism and A Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Critical feminist history of psychology versus sociology of scientific knowledge: Contrasting views of women scientists?

Febbraro

2020

Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the rise of second-wave feminism, new theoretical perspectives on women scientists began to emerge. By the 1980s and 1990s, 2 contrasting views of women scientists were discernible. Within the former, critical feminist historians rendered more visible and re/placed the lives and achievements of women psychologists within psychology's history, challenged the "add women and stir" approach to the history of women psychologists, and suggested the need to view history through the lens of women's distinct experiences within sexist scientific structures. Within the sociology of scientific knowledge, the contributions and experiences of women scientists remained largely ignored in favor of a meritocratic, universalistic, and objectivist image of science, despite recognition of the importance of social relations in scientific knowledge production. Today, a comparative analysis of developments within psychology and the sociology of scientific knowledge suggests a more nuanced, less dichotomous juxtaposition of views. Alongside critical feminist history of psychology, objectivist views of women scientists have also remained evident within related psychological subdisciplines, and the sociology of scientific knowledge has seen the emergence of feminist studies of science, technology, and society, on the borders of more traditional, objectivist views. This article reflects on some of the assumptions underlying different views of women scientists, past and present, within these (sub)disciplines. More broadly, this article examines the relevance of new developments in feminist theory and neoliberalism in theorizing women's scientific careers, analyzes conceptualizations of gender discrimination and their implications for theory, and considers whether such (sub)disciplinary comparisons remain pertinent to understanding gendered scientific structures. Public Significance StatementThis article speaks to the need to understand sexist discrimination, and other forms of discrimination, in terms of its multiple, varied, and interconnected manifestations. Discrimination, within science and society, can be both overt and covert, and both informal and formal. As such, discrimination can be expressed in individual "choices," as well as in cultural or other structural constraints. Rather than understanding discrimination narrowly, as distinguishable from culture, discrimination must be understood broadly, as pervasive throughout culture and society. Specifically, this article suggests that the insights of critical feminist historians within psychology, as well as new feminist perspectives within the sociology of science, may provide understandings of women scientists that are more inclusive and contextual, that recognize the pervasiveness of sexist discrimination in all its forms, and that view social relations as complex, as indeterminate, and as inextricably linked to both individual subjectivities and broader scientific and societal structures.

show abstract

“…Students review Eysenck's theories of biologically based personality traits and Buss's evolutionary theory and critiques of gendered (Reiber, 2015) and ethnocultural (Bianchi & Strang, 2013) "blindness" in hormonal and genetic explanations for differences in aggression, dominance, and emotional stability. Helpful are historical analyses: Eagly and Wood (2013) on controversies over biological rationales for traditional gender role behaviors and "reproductive strategies" (i.e., male promiscuity and rape), Hrdy's (1998) analysis of bias in primate research challenging animal "evidence" for human gender differences, Zuckerman's (1998) compelling cross-cultural challenge to connections between race and personality, and Shields (2016) on the strong influence that gendered social values have on the research process.…”

Section: Course Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching personality and abnormal psychology with inclusivity.

Cheng

McCloskey

Matacin

2019

Integrating Multiculturalism and Intersectionality Into the Psychology Curriculum: Strategies for Instructors.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

P sychology portrays human beings as unique, with different personality characteristics dimensionally categorized, such as introverted or extroverted, loud or quiet, optimistic or pessimistic, and thoughtful or impulsive. "Acceptable" characteristics are considered "optimal," whereas problematic characteristics are labeled "abnormal," demonstrating an etic bias. We challenge these assumptions by addressing societal and cultural influences on individuals (Lee, 2012) and the saliency of language-based descriptors within different groups (Cortina, Curtin, & Stewart, 2012). In this chapter, we each offer our experiences teaching personality and abnormal psychology, as well as pedagogical issues and challenges in doing so.

show abstract

Functionalism, Darwinism, and advances in the psychology of women and gender: From the 19th century to the 21st

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Drivers of Subjective Well-Being Under Different Economic Scenarios

Drivers of Subjective Well-Being Under Different Economic Scenarios

Critical feminist history of psychology versus sociology of scientific knowledge: Contrasting views of women scientists?

Teaching personality and abnormal psychology with inclusivity.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About