Maladjustment implications of self and group gender–role discrepancies: An ordered-discrepancy model

Abstract

Deviation from personal ideals and group standards has maladaptive consequences. Using insights from self-categorization and social identity theories, an ordereddiscrepancy model of maladjustment was proposed in which simultaneously deviating from both types of standards is associated with increased maladjustment for members of high status groups, except when such dual discrepancies imply that one is closer to one's ideals than is one's group. In the latter case, decreased maladjustment can be expected. For members of low status groups, discrepancies from ideals, but not from one's group, were expected to predict maladjustment. Patterns of deviations on dimensions of masculinity and femininity predicted maladjustment among men, a high status group, and women, a low status group, as hypothesized. Implications for social identity and self-categorization theories, and for gender±role research, are discussed.

Social identification and gender‐related ideology in women and men

“…Secondly, the present results do not necessarily suggest that gender-related identity is unimportant to men; indeed, there is evidence that men's psychological well-being, to a greater extent than women's, is tied to group-based notions of appropriate behaviour (e.g. Burris, Branscombe, & Klar, 1997;O'Neil, Good, & Holmes, 1995). In this context, it is interesting to note that men who identi ed themselves as non-traditional tended to report not only weaker ties to the group, but less positive group-derived feelings, than traditional men; this suggests that 'being a man' is a less desirable identity for the former subgroup.…”

Moving Beyond Gender to Discover Differences in Sensitivity to Disempowering Acts

“…The finding also might be explained by two important factors. First, there is pressure, particularly on African American men, to conform to groups (Staples, 1978), and individuals generally seek to be perceived as a part of a group (Burris et al, 1997;Crandell et al, 2000). Second, in the North Carolina group, where African Americans composed the majority within groups, there may have been an emphasis on group membership that primed a collective identity and made social identity more salient (Brickson, 2000).…”

“…Hogg and Hains (1996) found that when groups perceive their own status to be high, there is a greater likelihood that group members will identify with the group. In fact, if attitudes differ from those held by valued social group members, individuals may experience negative emotional consequences such as lower self-esteem (Burris, Branscombe, & Klar, 1997;Pool, Wood, & Leck, 1998). Ashmore et al (2004) noted social embeddedness, or the extent to which people are reminded of their collective identity, as another important factor in making collective identity salient.…”