On Gilligan's "In a Different Voice"

Auerbach, Judith G.; Blum, Linda M.; Smith, Vicki L.; Williams, Christine

doi:10.2307/3180143

Cited by 35 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She is charged with ignoring the influence of social factors (such as class and political ideology) which can contribute to divisions among women (as among men) in ethical orientation [see Auerbach et al, 1985, andStack, 1986]. So far, though, the investigation has been limited to the personal and immediate pastoral sphere of clergywomen's lives.…”

Section: A Voice Within the Different Voice: Radical Clergywomenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different Voice / Different Voices: Anglican Women in Ministry

Stevens¹

1989

Review of Religious Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: A Voice Within the Different Voice: Radical Clergywomenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different Voice / Different Voices: Anglican Women in Ministry

Stevens¹

1989

Review of Religious Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Allegations of race and class biases in Gilligan's work have received noteworthy attention (Nicholson, 1983;Stack, 1986;Tronto, 1987). Some of Gilligan's critics have questioned whether her findings reflect actual gender differences (Nails, 1983;Nicholson, 1983;Walker, 1983;Auerbach et al, 1985;Greeno and Maccoby, 1986). Others report empirical research that repudiates Gilligan's claims (Pratt, Golding and Hunter, 1982;Walker, 1984Walker, , 1989Thoma, 1986;Friedman, Robinson, and Friedman, 1987;Walker, de Vries, and Trevethan, 1987;Donenberg and Hoffman, 1988;Galotti, 1989;Pratt et al, 1990).…”

Section: Evaluating Gilligan's Researchmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Some scholars have assailed Gilligan on ideological grounds (Walker, 1983;Auerbach et al, 1985;Hayles, 1986;Kerber, 1986), but much of this criticism does not seem to undermine her assertion of fundamental differences between men and women. Gilligan has also been the target of methodological attacks (Broughton, 1983;Nails, 1983;Nicholson, 1983;Auerbach et al, 1985;Kerber, 1986;Luria, 1986). Allegations of race and class biases in Gilligan's work have received noteworthy attention (Nicholson, 1983;Stack, 1986;Tronto, 1987).…”

Section: Evaluating Gilligan's Researchmentioning

confidence: 93%

The different voices of helping: Gender differences in recounting dilemmas

Wolfinger

Rabow²,

Newcomb

1999

Gend. Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1977, 1982) has proposed fundamental gender differences. Women typically conceptualize interpersonal dilemmas in terms of people and their relationships, whereas men often orient to dilemmas as practical problems. Although considerable research has explored these gender differences, they have usually been treated as psychological traits or abstract moral orientations. In this article we show how Gilligan's theory accounts for gender differences when interviewees described their efforts to prevent others from driving under the influence (DUI intervention). This result extends Gilligan's theory by showing how it can account for real life differences between men and women. By demonstrating the relevance of Gilligan's gender differences to everyday life, we lay a foundation for further sociological exploration of her ideas.

show abstract

“…For example, her critics allege that in her anecdotal style of reporting findings, she selectively presents data that support her pre-existing hypotheses (Broughton, 1983;Nails, 1983;Sommers, 1995). She has also been criticized for claiming gender differences in moral reasoning based on research with female-only samples (Auerbach, Blum, Smith, & Williams, 1985;Kerber, 1986;Sommers, 1995).…”

Section: Critiques Of Gilligan's Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scholars have additionally criticized Gilligan for implying a biological basis for any gender differences in moral reasoning while ignoring potential socially-based causes of gender differences, such as subordinate social status (Auerbach et al, 1985;Kerber, 1986;Tronto, 1987). A related critique is that Gilligan overemphasizes the significance of gender in moral reasoning while ignoring cultural characteristics such as ethnicity or socioeconomic status that could impact moral reasoning (Auerbach et al, 1985;Contratto, 1994;Nicholson, 1983;Tronto, 1987). If subordinate social status is the critical variable underlying care reasoning, we might predict this reasoning to predominate in a variety of groups (e.g., women, racial and ethnic minorities, or people of lower socioeconomic status) with lower social status, as opposed to only in women (Tronto, 1987).…”

Section: Critiques Of Gilligan's Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protection as care: Moral reasoning and moral orientation among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse older women

Dakin

2014

Journal of Aging Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined moral reasoning among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse older women based on the care and justice moral orientations reflecting theoretical frameworks developed by Carol Gilligan and Lawrence Kohlberg, respectively. A major gap in this area of research and theory development has been the lack of examination of moral reasoning in later life. This study addressed this gap by assessing socioeconomically and ethnically diverse older women's reasoning in response to ethical dilemmas showing conflict between autonomy, representative of Kohlberg's justice orientation, and protection, representative of Gilligan's care orientation. The dilemmas used in this study came from adult protective services (APS), the U.S. system that investigates and intervenes in cases of elder abuse and neglect. Subjects were 88 African American, Latina, and Caucasian women age 60 or over from varying socioeconomic status backgrounds who participated in eight focus groups. Overall, participants favored protection over autonomy in responding to the case scenarios. Their reasoning in responding to these dilemmas reflected an ethic of care and responsibility and a recognition of the limitations of autonomy. This reasoning is highly consistent with the care orientation. Variations in the overall ethic of care and responsibility based on ethnicity and SES also are discussed.

show abstract

On Gilligan's "In a Different Voice"

Cited by 35 publications

References 0 publications

Different Voice / Different Voices: Anglican Women in Ministry

Different Voice / Different Voices: Anglican Women in Ministry

The different voices of helping: Gender differences in recounting dilemmas

Protection as care: Moral reasoning and moral orientation among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse older women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About