Gender Ideology: Components, Predictors, and Consequences

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to review research on the construction of gender ideology and its consequences. The article begins with a summary of research focused on measuring gender ideology—individuals' levels of support for a division of paid work and family responsibilities that is based on the belief in gendered separate spheres. We describe the ways this concept has been operationalized in widely available data sources and provide a categorization schema for the items used to measure gender ideology. We also review the research predicting gender ideology, focusing on social and demographic characteristics while concurrently examining studies using cross-sectional, trend, and panel data. Finally, this article summarizes research focused on the consequences of gender ideology, both in families and family-related behaviors and in other areas of social life where beliefs about gender are relevant, such as the workplace. We conclude with implications for future research for measurement tools, predictors of gender ideology, and consequences of ideology in individuals' lives.

Religion and Gender Ideologies among Working-Age U.S. Latinas/os

“…First, consistent with previous theory and research (Davis and Greenstein 2009;Kane 2000), education was consistently associated with more progressive gender ideologies. By contrast, household income, another SES indicator, had no bearing on any facets of gender ideology considered here.…”

“…Over the past four decades, numerous studies have examined patterns, correlates, and trends pertaining to gender ideology. Much of this literature has centered on three specific areas: (a) beliefs about the appropriate roles of women and men in the home and family and in the public sphere (e.g., workplace and politics); (b) beliefs about the origins of gender inequality (e.g., innate versus socially defined); and (c) beliefs about the desirability of various social actions and policies aimed at ameliorating gender inequality (Davis and Greenstein 2009;Kane 2000).…”

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Longitudinal Changes in Leisure-Time Physical Activity From Adolescence to Young Adulthood

“…This greater role may partly be connected with the fact that emerging adulthood brings with it different role expectations for women than for men. Although egalitarian gender role attitudes provide models for negotiating family and work, family responsibilities and child rearing nevertheless continue to be performed mainly by women (Davis & Greenstein, 2009). This may partially explain the differences between physical activity habits among men and women.…”

Institutions as reference points for parents-to-be in European societies: a theoretical and analytical framework

“…In line with these changes, a significant increase in educational homogamy, or non-traditional resource matches, understood as similar levels of educational attainment or earnings among male and female partners, has been found in European countries (Blossfeld and Timm 2003). This trend is mirrored by more egalitarian gender ideologies held by younger cohorts (Davis and Greenstein 2009;Dorius and Alwin 2010;Lück 2006;Pfau-Effinger and Euler 2014). Since both sexes are more highly educated compared to their parents' generation, have more similar labour market experiences and enter couple relationships on more equal terms, scholars interested in the gendered division of labour expected to observe more gender egalitarian divisions of paid and unpaid work among these couples and families.…”

“…Since both sexes are more highly educated compared to their parents' generation, have more similar labour market experiences and enter couple relationships on more equal terms, scholars interested in the gendered division of labour expected to observe more gender egalitarian divisions of paid and unpaid work among these couples and families. Instead, research consistently shows that the decrease in traditional family arrangements has been moderate, leading to a widening gap over time between increasingly egalitarian gender ideologies and actual patterns of behaviour (Davis and Greenstein 2009;Grunow, Schulz and Blossfeld 2012). But why would couples sharing egalitarian gender ideologies and living fairly egalitarian lives adopt traditional gender practices?…”