Gender 2

View mindmap
  • Gender 2
    • 3A cognitive explanations of gender development
      • Kohlberg cog development theory- child's understanding of gender develops with age. result of active structuring of their own experiences. internally driven. child actively seeks out behav with gender in social enviro
        • 1) gender identity 2 y/o- basic sense of gender identity. can label themselves and others. child not clear gender is fixed. rely on cues e.g. hair. boys saying 'when i grow up i'll be a mummy'
        • 2) gender stability 4y/o- realises their gender is permanent, unsure of others. rely on cues e.g. hair. easily confused
        • 3) gender constancy 6y/o- gender is constant despite clothes. motivated to learn about that gender role. look for models, thought and actions fully gendered
        • A03- stages allow tracking children, alerts any issues, guide to give child appropriate enviro. influential on Piaget on conservation-ability to think logically. stages may overstate similarities in children and age ranges may be inappropriate-beta bias. 1966- gender role signif difs, lacks temporal validity. young children may lack vocab to express understanding
      • Slaby & Frey- assessed level of gender constancy of 2-5 y/os using 14 Qs and counter Qs e.g. 'are you a boy or girl'. weeks later watched film and fixation measured. higher gender constancy= selective attention to same sex model. child actively seeks gender info in gender constancy stage
        • effect only signif for boys, girls spent more time looking at male. high artificiality, lacking eco and external validity. cant generalise to real life setting
      • Bussey & Bandura- not trying to meet gender label, at 30 months already pick same sex toys, behav conformed to gender linked stereotypes despite stages, SLT. high control, contrived
    • 3B gender schema theory
      • organised group of related concepts/cog structures/mental representations about each sex and appropriate sex behav
      • Martin & Halverson- children begin to form schemas once they notice people are organised into male/ female (2-3y/o). developed by interactions with other children and adults. allows them to organise info to learn which toys appropriate
        • 3 types of sex role schemas- in groups (group they identify with), or out of group (opposite group). as more info is gathered, own sex schema elaborated while opposite sex schema lacks dev. forgetting 'not for me'
        • maintenance of gender schema may relate to sense of 'good' & 'bad", increase self esteem
        • see stereotypes as inevitable. natural to organise info
        • AO3- better explains earlier adoption of gender role behav by Kohlberg-fits with research showing adoption of behav at 2-3, more why rather than when. underestimates role of social forces (B & B), no account of how they begin
      • Martin & Halverson- effect of sex stereotypes on cog not behav. 48 white middle class children 5-6, asked to look at black and white line drawings of male/female activities. some sex consistent, others not. recall a week later- more likely to remember sex consistent pics
        • shows active role of sex role stereotypes, artificial so careful to generalise. other research found similar effects in children under 4- fits more gender schema theory
    • 4 psychodynamic explanation of gender dev
      • psychodynamic theory- psych is a tripartie, id is unconscious, conflict source of behav, defence mechanisms e.g. denial, 2 basic drives (Eros the life drive & Thanatos the dream instinct, predetermined psychosexual stages
      • gender development- Freudian thinking- young children have no concept of gender identity- bisexual (both masc and fem). phallic stage= pleasure in genitals, children become aware of anatomical dif between sexes
      • oedipus complex (conflict)- beginning of phallic stage little boys want possession of mothers ('primary sex object'). father is rival for mother's attention, develops jealous hatred wishing father 'dead'. boy in conflict as hatred for father matched to love for him. fear wishing him dead with be punished through castration. recognition sisters don't have penis so have already been castrated
        • to resolve conflict boy gives up love for mother and seeks love objects like her. becomes like father. identification- adopts attitudes, values and behav of model. internalisation- gender identity matches model
        • little Hans- phobia of horse falling dead, representation of fears his wish his father would die. feared they'd bite him (castration anxieties). mother threatening to send him to be castrated, wish to drown his sister and story about giraffe where mother giraffe is safe in his pocket. wants to be a mummy vs older wants to be a father- identity conforming
          • AO3- cant be falsified- case study, careful to generalise, subjective interpretation, based on secondary data. suggests masc identity more robust with stricter fathers- no evidence, more liberal fathers often led to boy more secure with masc. w/o father= impact on gender dev, Green- kids raised by female homosexuals, 36/37 recalled object typical of their sex. electra complex= after though, feminist psychol reject penis envy
      • electra complex- at 4y/os girls love their mother still have primary love object but blame them for their missing penis (privileges society grants males- penis envy). leads to anger, guilt and fear of loss of mother's love- identifies with mother to avoid this. dev strong feelings for father, symbolically wishes to be impregnated by father to 'replace' missing penis. conflict with mother as love rival
        • electra less powerful as doesn't involve fear of castration. never fully separate from mother- weaker superego


No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Gender resources »