Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods, and conclusions.

Taylor, Marylee C.; Hall, Judith A.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.2.347

Cited by 392 publications

(240 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

216

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Theorists have posited that individuals who are gender nonconforming have optimal mental health (Taylor & Hall, 1982), given that conforming to strict gender identities can be inhibiting (Woodhill & Samuels, 2004), and because certain gender norms are inherently dysfunctional, such as restrictions on men's emotionality (Mahalik et al, 2003).…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of feminine and masculine norms in college women’s alcohol use.

Kaya

2016

Psychology of Men & Masculinity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current literature suggests not only that men and women can conform to both feminine and masculine norms, but that women who adhere to certain masculine norms may be at greater risk for problematic alcohol use. This study examined conformity to both masculine and feminine norms, and how conformity to distinct norms influenced heavy episodic drinking and alcohol-related problems among a sample of underage college women (N= 645). Results demonstrated that the masculine norms risk-taking and emotional control were associated with increased HED, while the masculine norm power over women was associated with a decrease in HED. Traditional feminine norms, including modesty and sexual fidelity, were associated with a decrease in HED and alcohol-related problems. The feminine norm relational was associated with increased HED, while the norms thinness and appearance were associated with increased alcohol-related problems. The study's theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of feminine and masculine norms in college women’s alcohol use.

Kaya

2016

Psychology of Men & Masculinity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As indexes of self-reported instrumental/agentic and communal/expressive tendencies, respectively, they predict primarily to domains that draw on those tendencies (cf. Feather, 1984;Spence, 1984Spence, , 1985; M. C. Taylor & Hall, 1982). For example, being high in communal characteristics might be related to success in an occupation like nursing that presumably draws on communality, but would not necessarily predict success in an occupation unrelated to communion, like cooking.…”

Section: Self-system Of the Targetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior.

Deaux¹,

Major²

1987

Psychological Review

1,054

802

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A model that describes conditions influencing the display of gender-related behavior is presented as a supplement to existent models of sex differences. Whereas many previous models stress the importance of distal factors, our model emphasizes the degree to which gender-related behavior is variable, proximally caused, and context dependent. More specifically, we propose that gender-related behaviore are influenced by the expectations of perceivers, self-systems of the target, and situational cues. This model of gender-related behavior builds on theory and data in the areas of (a) expectancy confirmation processes and (b) self-verification and self-presentation strategies. Support for the model is presented, and suggestions are offered for its future development.Are men and women different, and if so, why? These seemingly simple questions have proved remarkably resistant to satisfactory answers, despite a long tradition of attempts. Investigators of some eras have emphasized differences between women and men, whereas those of other eras have argued for the essential similarity of the sexes. For example, in recent years one can observe a minimization of sex differences in the benchmark work of Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) and a reendorsement of sex differences in the subsequent work of Gilligan (1982), Eagly (1987), and others. Proponents of both views have had problems. Those who predict stable sex differences have had trouble accounting for the often limited ability of sex to predict behavior and for a variability that sometimes appears random.The order of authorship for this article was determined alphabetically and hence is arbitrary. The contributions of both authors are equivalent and inseparable.Portions of this article were developed while Kay Deaux was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, where support was provided in part by the John D. and Catherine T. McArthur Foundation. Additional support was provided by Grants BNS-8217313 and BNS-8604993 from the National Science Foundation to Kay Deaux.Many people have contributed to our thinking in this article. A preliminary version of the model was presented at the Nags Head Conference on Sex and Gender in May 198S, and we thank the members of that conference for their feedback. The members of the Self, Cognition, and Affect Project at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences provided valuable input and a stimulating context. In addition, we thank the following people for their comments on earlier versions of this article: Richard Ashmore, Nyla Branscombe, Jennifer Crocker, John Darley, Frances Del Boca, Alice Eagly, Russ Fazio, Sam Glucksberg, Tory Higgins, Bill Martin, and Janet Spence.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kay Deaux, who is now at City University of New York, Graduate Center, Box 325, 33 West 42 Street, New York, New York 10036-8099 or to Brenda Major, Department of Psychology, Park Hall, State University of New York at Buffalo, Amherst, New York 14260.Those who argue that ...

show abstract

“…Androgyny as an Interactive Concept Taylor and Hall's (1982) review of the literature lends strong support to arguments that masculinity rather than androgyny predicts adjustment for both sexes. They advocated analyzing the data via a two-way ANOVA (high M, low M) X (high F, low F) which would allow researchers to examine the effects of androgyny apart from the main effects of masculinity and femininity; rather than classifying people into sex-role groups on the basis of a median-split of M and F scores, and then analyzing the data via a one-way ANOVA over sex-role classifications.…”

Section: Masculinity Versus Androgyny As a Predictor Of Psychologicalmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Since that time however, the validity of the BSRI and PAQ as measures of masculinity and femininity has been called into question. Moreover, a general consensus is emerging that it is BSRI masculinity, not androgyny which predicts adjustment for both sexes (Taylor & Hall, 1982).…”

Section: A Brief History Of Androgyny Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Androgyny and sex role measurement: A personal construct approach.

Baldwin

Critelli

Stevens³

et al. 1986

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we report the results of two studies that used a new sex role instrument, the Sex-Rep. The Sex-Rep uses ideographically elicited sex role constructs, rather than stereotypes, to determine classification. Results from the first study indicated that personal feminine constructs may be healthier than feminine stereotypes in some contexts. The second study showed that the Sex-Rep discriminates gender as well as does the Bern Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) and that these two instruments are nonredundant. Results also indicated that the apparent positive relation between masculinity and adjustment may be a measurement artifact. The different purposes of the Sex-Rep and the BSRI are discussed.Recent research into sex roles has focused on psychological androgyny, the combination of both masculine and feminine traits in a person of either sex. Androgynists maintain that this balanced, adaptable character structure is preferable to the onesided masculinity or femininity of the sex-typed individual.Androgyny theory led to the development of sex role inventories in which self-descriptions could encompass both masculine and feminine traits. To this end the Bern Sex Role Inventory (BSRI; Bern, 1974) was created. Other similar inventories have followed, most notably the Personal Attributes Questionnaire

show abstract

Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods, and conclusions.

Cited by 392 publications

References 102 publications

The role of feminine and masculine norms in college women’s alcohol use.

The role of feminine and masculine norms in college women’s alcohol use.

Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior.

Androgyny and sex role measurement: A personal construct approach.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About