The Influence of Masculine, Feminine, and Neutral Tasks on Children's Achievement Behavior, Expectancies of Success, and Attainment Values

Stein, Aletha Huston; Pohly, Sheila Rimland; Mueller, Edward

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1971.tb03629.x

Cited by 50 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gender stereotyping labels also have been demonstrated to influence children's motivation, accuracy, and expectancies for success (Davies, 1986(Davies, , 1989Gold & Berger, 1978;Hargreaves, Bates, & Foot, 1985;Stein, Pohly, & Mueller, 1971). The influence of gender stereotype labels on children's motivation was well documented in a classic and often-cited study involving children's performance and liking of a novel throwing game, Mr. Munchie, which was given gender-typed labels (e.g., "the game is for girls, like jacks").…”

Section: Gender Stereotype Knowledge As An Organizer Of Gender Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive theories of early gender development.

Martin¹,

Ruble

Szkrybalo

2002

Psychological Bulletin

528

514

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The contribution of cognitive perspectives (cognitive-developmental theory and gender schema theory) to a contemporary understanding of gender development is evaluated. Recent critiques of cognitive approaches are discussed and empirical evidence is presented to counter these critiques. Because of the centrality of early gender development to the cognitive perspective, the latest research is reviewed on how infants and toddlers discriminate the sexes and learn the attributes correlated with sex. The essence of cognitive approaches-emphasis on motivational consequences of gender concepts; the active, self-initiated view of development; and focus on developmental patterns-is highlighted and contrasted with social-cognitive views. The value of cognitive theories to the field is illustrated, and recommendations are made concerning how to construct comprehensive, integrative perspectives of gender development.How individuals develop a "gendered" self and gender-typed differentiation has intrigued researchers of human behavior for as long as social development has been a field of empirical study. Initially, observations of clear gender typing in children as young as 5 years old led researchers to examine how socialization processes in the home might contribute to this early acquisition of gender-linked behavior (e.g., Sears, Maccoby, & Levin, 1957). In 1966, several important theories of gender development, including Kohlberg's cognitive-developmental approach and Mischel's social learning approach, were outlined in Maccoby's book on the development of sex differences. In the mid-1970s, a groundbreaking book by Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) broadened the discussion about the etiology of sex differences and gender typing and questioned the significance of socialization processes, thereby invigorating the field and generating considerable controversy. In the 1980s, Huston (1983Huston ( , 1985 called for researchers to develop a more integrative, comprehensive approach to the study of gender development. This integration was to include consideration of the many facets of gender that needed investigation, such as concepts, identity, preferences, and behavior, as well as a wide variety of factors that influence the development of these facets, including biology, cognitions, and social influences. This idea resonated with gender researchers and has been a driving force in the field ever since, leading to an expansion of theoretical approaches and the inclusion of multiple measures in empirical studies.Recently, Bussey and Bandura (1999) presented a socialcognitive theory (SCT) of gender development and differentiation. This theory represents a particular view of how gender-related behavior is acquired and maintained, based on contemporary social learning theory (Bandura, 1986). Because the theory has now integrated cognitive constructs and makes reference to biological underpinnings and sociostructural factors, Bussey and Bandura described their theory as comprehensive and integrative, consistent with Huston's (1983) proposal,...

show abstract

Section: Gender Stereotype Knowledge As An Organizer Of Gender Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive theories of early gender development.

Martin¹,

Ruble

Szkrybalo

2002

Psychological Bulletin

528

514

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since women and men are expected to develop different characteristics and behavioural patterns, they end up developing and exhibiting these characteristics and patterns (Kemmelmeier & Oyserman, 2001). As a result, when focused on stereotypically female tasks, women expect to succeed (Lenney, 1981;Stein, Pohly, & Mueller, 1971), whereas this self-confidence unfortunately fades in domains of stereotypically male achievement (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974). Despite comparable levels of actual performance on specific tasks, women are less confident than men (Bornholt, Goodnow, & Cooney, 1994), and tend to underestimate their performance in these male domains (Beyer, 1990).…”

Section: Domains Related To Gender Stereotypes and Expertisementioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of comparisons with out‐group members on women's self‐esteem: Role of the stereotypical connotation of the performance context

Martinot¹,

Redersdorff²

2003

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although upward comparisons may threaten people's self‐esteem, research has argued that this is not the case if the comparison other is an out‐group member. To protect their self‐esteem individuals would dismiss upward comparison information involving out‐group members as not being self‐relevant. We suggest that use of this self‐protective strategy is dependent on the stereotypical connotation of the performance context. Women's self‐esteem would suffer from upward out‐group comparisons on a male‐labelled task but not on a female one because the assumed expertise of women in the latter domain would allow them to reject the comparison information. To test this hypothesis, female participants were led to believe that they were Z‐types group members in comparison with X‐types group members. After doing a test presumably designed to assess either their verbal‐spatial ability (male‐labelled task) or their sociorelational expressiveness (female‐labelled task), they were exposed to bogus information on the performance of three other individuals who were always described as X‐types group members (out‐group members). These out‐group members had performed either better (upward comparison) or worse (downward comparison) than the participants themselves. Supporting the hypothesis, women who had been confronted with the superior performance of out‐group members on the male‐labelled task reported lower self‐esteem than those confronted with the superior performance of out‐group members on the female‐labelled task. When women perform a stereotypically female task, upward comparisons with out‐group members do not decrease their self‐esteem, suggesting that women are in a position to protect their self‐esteem by dismissing the self‐relevance of such comparisons. The assumed expertise of women as a function of the stereotypical gender connotation of the performance context could explain such results. The influence of the social division of gender roles on women's social identity is discussed. La littérature suggère que les comparaisons ascendantes menacent L'estime de soi des individus, sauf lorsque ces comparaisons se déroulent avec des membres d'un exogroupe. En effet, les individus se protègeraient de telles comparaisons en ne les estimant pas pertinentes. Toutefois, nous suggérons que L'utilisation d'une telle stratégie d'auto‐protection dépend de la connotation stéréotypique du contexte de performance. Ainsi, L'estime de soi des femmes serait affaiblie par des comparaisons ascendantes avec des membres d'un exogroupe uniquement si ces dernières portent sur un domaine stéréotypiquement perçu comme masculin et non sur un domaine stéréotypiquement perçu comme féminin. Pour tester cette hypothèse, des participantes sont conduites à croire qu'en tant que membres du groupe des types‐Z elles vont être comparées aux membres du groupe des types‐X. Après avoir réalisé un test supposé évaluer soit leur capacité spatio‐verbale (tâche à connotation masculine) soit leur expressivité socio‐relationnelle (tâche à connotation féminine), elles ...

show abstract

“…Another important factor that affects expressed confidence in predicting how well a task will be performed is whether the task is perceived as being congruent with one's sex role. Tasks that are presented as sex-role inappropriate result in lower expectations of success and lower confidence (Stein, Pohly, & Mueller, 1971).…”

Section: Attempts To De-bias Via Training and Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%