Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity

  • Feminist Forum Review Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gender identity reflects people’s understanding of themselves in terms of cultural definitions of female and male. In this article, we identify two traditions of research on gender identity that capture different aspects of masculine and feminine gender roles. The classic personality approach to gender identity differentiates communal from agentic traits and interests. The gender self-categorization approach comprises identification with the social category of women or men. Based on the compatibility principle, each approach should predict behaviors within the relevant content domain. Thus, personality measures likely predict communal and agentic behaviors, whereas gender self-categorization measures likely predict group-level reactions such as ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation. Researchers have the option of using one or the other conception of gender identity, depending on their particular question of interest. Relying primarily on research conducted in the U.S., we show that both traditions provide insight into the ways that gendered self concepts link the social roles of women and men with their individual cognitions, emotions, and behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abele, A. E. (2003). The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 768–776. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.768.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2014). Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 195–255. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrams, D., Thomas, J., & Hogg, M. A. (1990). Numerical distinctiveness, social identity and gender salience. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 87–92. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00889.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aidman, E. V., & Carroll, S. M. (2003). Implicit individual differences: Relationships between implicit self-esteem, gender identity, and gender attitudes. European Journal of Personality, 17, 19–36. doi:10.1002/per.465.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (2012). Values, attitudes, and behavior. In S. Salzborn, E. Davidov, & J. Reinecke (Eds.), Methods, theories, and empirical applications in the social sciences (pp. 33–38). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-18898-0_5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.888.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 241–253. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.2.241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R. D. (1990). Sex, gender, and the individual. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 486–526). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmore, R. D., Deaux, K., & McLaughlin-Volpe, T. (2004). An organizing framework for collective identity: Articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 80–114. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.1.80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassoff, E. S., & Glass, G. V. (1982). The relationship between sex roles and mental health: A meta-analysis of twenty-six studies. The Counseling Psychologist, 10, 105–112. doi:10.1177/0011000082104019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., & Sommer, K. L. (1997). What do men want? Gender differences and two spheres of belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madson (1997). Psychological Bulletin, 112, 38–44. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.122.1.38.

  • Becker, J. C., & Wagner, U. (2009). Doing gender differently—The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women’s endorsement of sexist beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 487–508. doi:10.1002/ejsp.551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162. doi:10.1037/h0036215.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L., & Lenney, E. (1976). Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 48–54. doi:10.1037/h0078640.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L., & Lewis, S. A. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634–643. doi:10.1037/h0077098.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosson, J. K., & Michniewicz, K. S. (2013). Gender dichotomization at the level of ingroup identity: What it is, and why men use it more than women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 425–442. doi:10.1037/a0033126.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Branscombe, N. R. (1998). Thinking about one’s gender group’s privileges or disadvantages: Consequences for well‐being in women and men. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 167–184. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1998.tb01163.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Chen, Y. R. (2007). Where (who) are collectives in collectivism? Toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism. Psychological Review, 114, 133–151. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.133.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we?” Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83–93. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Lui, L. N. (1989). The primacy of age and sex in the structure of person categories. Social Cognition, 7, 262–274. doi:10.1521/soco.1989.7.3.262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972). Sex‐role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 59–78. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1972.tb00018.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, J. W., Anderson, W. P., & Heppner, P. P. (1995). Gender roles and self‐esteem: A consideration of environmental factors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 323–326. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1995.tb01757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadinu, M., & Galdi, S. (2012). Gender differences in implicit gender self‐categorization lead to stronger gender self‐stereotyping by women than by men. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 546–551. doi:10.1002/ejsp.1881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadinu, M., Latrofa, M., & Carnaghi, A. (2013). Comparing self-stereotyping with in-group-stereotyping and out-group-stereotyping in unequal-status groups: The case of gender. Self and Identity, 12, 582–596. doi:10.1080/15298868.2012.712753.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2012). Cybernetic control processes and the self-regulation of behavior. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 28–42). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, B. P., Duberstein, P. R., Sörensen, S., & Lyness, J. M. (2007). Gender differences in five factor model personality traits in an elderly cohort. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1594–1603. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.04.028.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, N., Fuqua, D. R., & Newman, J. L. (2007). Hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 818–832. doi:10.1177/0013164406299106.

  • Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80, 389–407. doi:10.1037/h0035334.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.322.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.122.1.5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, S. E., Hardin, E. E., & Gercek-Swing, B. (2011). The what, how, why, and where of self-construal. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 142–179. doi:10.1177/1088868310373752.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S. N., & Risman, B. J. (2015). Feminists wrestle with testosterone: Hormones, socialization and cultural interactionism as predictors of women’s gendered selves. Social Science Research, 49, 110–125. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.07.012.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K. (1987). Psychological constructions of masculinity and femininity. In J. M. Reinisch, L. A. Rosenblum, & S. A. Sanders (Eds.), Masculinity-femininity: Basic perspectives (pp. 289–303). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., & Lewis, L. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991–1004. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). Of men, women, and motivation: A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 434–447). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246.

  • Eagan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 37, 451–463. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Riger, S. (2014). Feminism and psychology: Critiques of methods and epistemology. American Psychologist, 69, 685–702. doi:10.1037/a0037372.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 458–476). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2013). The nature–nurture debates: 25 years of challenges in understanding the psychology of gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340–357. doi:10.1177/1745691613484767.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist, 67, 211–230. doi:10.1037/a0027260.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. J. (1995). The power in demography: Women’s social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 589–634. doi:10.2307/256740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. American Psychologist, 28, 404–416. doi:10.1037/h0034679.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1980). The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research. American Psychologist, 35, 790–806. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.35.9.790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evers, A., & Sieverding, M. (2014). Why do highly qualified women (still) earn less? Gender differences in long-term predictors of career success. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 93–106. doi:10.1177/0361684313498071.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, A. P., Haslam, N., & Fiske, S. T. (1991). Confusing one person with another: What errors reveal about the elementary forms of social relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 656–674. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.60.5.656.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 77–83. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W. L., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Gender differences in relational and collective interdependence: Implications for self-views, social behavior, and subjective well-being. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Psychology of gender (2nd ed., pp. 169–191). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2011). The associative-propositional evaluation model: Theory, evidence, and open questions. In M. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 59–127). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, J. J., & Sanchez, D. T. (2010). Doing gender for different reasons: Why gender conformity positively and negatively predicts self-esteem. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 203–214. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01562.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000). Using the Implicit Association Test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022–1038. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.1022.

  • Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41. doi:10.1037/a0015575.

  • Hagemeyer, B., & Neyer, F. J. (2012). Assessing implicit motivational orientations in couple relationships: The Partner-Related Agency and Communion Test (PACT). Psychological Assessment, 24, 114–128. doi:10.1037/a0024822.

  • Halim, M. L., Ruble, D. N., & Amodio, D. M. (2011). From pink frilly dresses to “one of the boys:” A social‐cognitive analysis of gender identity development and gender bias. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 933–949. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00399.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J., & LaFrance, B. (2012). “That’s gay:” Sexual prejudice, gender identity, norms, and homophobic communication. Communication Quarterly, 60, 35–58. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.641833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., & Taylor, M. C. (1985). Psychological androgyny and the Masculinity × Femininity interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 347–366. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.641833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hare-Mustin, R. T., & Marecek, J. (1988). The meaning of difference: Gender theory, postmodernism, and psychology. American Psychologist, 43, 455–464. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.43.6.455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmreich, R. L., Spence, J. T., & Holahan, C. K. (1979). Psychological androgyny and sex role flexibility: A test of two hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1631–1644. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., & Turner, J. C. (1987). Intergroup behaviour, self‐stereotyping and the salience of social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 325–340. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00795.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Josephs, R. A., Markus, H. R., & Tafarodi, R. W. (1992). Gender and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 391–402. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.391.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L., Yzerbyt, V., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.899.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kessels, U., & Hannover, B. (2008). When being a girl matters less: Accessibility of gender‐related self‐knowledge in single‐sex and coeducational classes and its impact on students’ physics‐related self‐concept of ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 273–289. doi:10.1348/000709907x215938.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kiefer, A. K., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2007). Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: A prospective study of female college students. Psychological Science, 18, 13–18. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01841.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koenig, A. M., & Eagly, A. H. (2014). Evidence for the social role theory of stereotype content: Observations of groups’ roles shape stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 371–392. doi:10.1037/a0037215.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kozee, H. B., Tylka, T. L., & Bauerband, L. A. (2012). Measuring transgender individuals’ comfort with gender identity and appearance development and validation of the Transgender Congruence Scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 179–196. doi:10.1177/0361684312442161.

  • Langis, J., Sabourin, S., Lussier, Y., & Mathieu, M. (1994). Masculinity, femininity, and marital satisfaction: An examination of theoretical models. Journal of Personality, 62, 393–414. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00303.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latrofa, M., Vaes, J., Cadinu, M., & Carnaghi, A. (2010). The cognitive representation of self-stereotyping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 911–922. doi:10.1177/0146167210373907.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, S. (1989). Sex role orientation and domains of self-esteem. Sex Roles, 21, 415–422. doi:10.1007/BF00289600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liben, L. S. (2014). The individual↔ context nexus in developmental intergroup theory: Within and beyond the ivory tower. Research in Human Development, 11, 273–290. doi:10.1080/15427609.2014.967048.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A. (1991). Some psychometric characteristics of gender diagnosticity measures: Reliability, validity, consistency across domains, and relationship to the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 1000–1011. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.6.1000.

  • Lippa, R. A. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 996–1009. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.996.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A. (2001). On deconstructing and reconstructing masculinity-femininity. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 168–207. doi:10.1006/jrpe.2000.2307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A. (2005). Gender, nature, and nurture. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A., & Connelly, S. (1990). Gender diagnosticity: A new Bayesian approach to gender-related individual differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1051–1065. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318. doi:10.1177/0146167292183006.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19–40. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H., Crane, M., Bernstein, S., & Siladi, M. (1982). Self-schemas and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 38–50. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W. (1987). The factorial invariance of responses by males and females to a multidimensional self-concept instrument: Substantive and methodological issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 457–480. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr2204_5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., & Byrne, B. M. (1991). Differentiated additive androgyny model: Relations between masculinity, femininity, and multiple dimensions of self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 811–828. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.5.811.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. J., & Padawer-Singer, A. (1976). Trait salience in the spontaneous self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 743–754. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.33.6.743.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, F. L., Mitchell, G., Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., & Tetlock, P. E. (2013). Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: A meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 171–192. doi:10.1037/a0032734.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pasterski, V., Zucker, K. J., Hindmarsh, P. C., Hughes, I. A., Acerini, C., Spencer, D., Neufeld, S., & Hines, M. (2015). Increased cross-gender identification independent of gender role behavior in girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia: Results from a standardized assessment of 4- to 11-year-old children. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0385-0.

  • Prislin, R., & Wood, W. (2005). Social influence in attitudes and attitude change. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 671–705). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, D., & Neumann, D. L. (2013). Gender-role differences in spatial ability: A meta-analytic review. Sex Roles, 68, 521–535. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0269-0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, D. T., & Crocker, J. (2005). How investment in gender ideals affects well-being: The role of external contingencies of self-worth. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 63–77. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00169.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2001). The good, the bad, and the manly: Threats to one’s prototypicality and evaluations of fellow in-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 510–517. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., Kobrynowicz, D., & Owen, S. (2002). Perceiving discrimination against one’s gender group has different implications for well-being in women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 197–210. doi:10.1177/0146167202282006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schnabel, K., Asendorpf, J. B., & Greenwald, A. G. (2008). Assessment of individual differences in implicit cognition: A review of IAT measures. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 210–217. doi:10.1027/1015-5759.24.4.210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Settles, I. H., & Buchanan, N. (2014). Multiple groups, multiple identities, and intersectionality. In V. Benet-Martinez & Y. Hong (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multicultural identity (pp. 160–180). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sex. (n.d.). In Oxford English Dictionary (3rd edition). Retrieved from http://www.oed.com

  • Shields, S. A. (1975). Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women. American Psychologist, 30, 739–754. doi:10.1037/h0076948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Signorella, M. L., & Jamison, W. (1986). Masculinity, femininity, androgyny, and cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 207–228. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.100.2.207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, S., Hardin, C. D., & Lowery, B. S. (2006). Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 529–542. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.529.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T. (1993). Gender-related traits and gender ideology: Evidence for a multifactorial theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 624–635. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.624.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. (1995). Masculinity and femininity: Defining the undefinable. In P. J. Kalbfleisch & M. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 105–138). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity & femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1980). Masculine instrumentality and feminine expressiveness: Their relationships with sex role attitudes and behaviors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 147–163. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1980.tb00951.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29–39. doi:10.1037/h0076857.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Holahan, C. K. (1979). Negative and positive components of psychological masculinity and femininity and their relationships to self-reports of neurotic and acting out behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1673–1682. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1673.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner-Pappalardo, N. L., & Gurung, R. A. (2002). The femininity effect: Relationship quality, sex, gender, attachment, and significant-other concepts. Personal Relationships, 9, 313–325. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00022.

  • Stets, J. E., & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 224–237. doi:10.2307/2695870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. C., & Hall, J. A. (1982). Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods, and conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 347–366. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.2.347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terman, L. M., & Miles, C. C. (1936). Sex and personality: Studies in masculinity and femininity. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, D. D., Menon, M., Menon, M., Spatta, B. C., Hodges, E. V., & Perry, D. G. (2010). The intrapsychics of gender: A model of self-socialization. Psychological Review, 117, 601–622. doi:10.1037/a0018936.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behaviour. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2, pp. 77–122). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325. doi:10.1007/BF02766650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Udry, J. R. (2000). Biological limits of gender construction. American Sociological Review, 65, 443–457. doi:10.2307/2657466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uleman, J. S., Newman, L. S., & Moskowitz, G. B. (1996). People as flexible interpreters: Evidence and issues from spontaneous trait inference. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 211–279. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60239-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Anders, S. M., Goldey, K. L., & Kuo, P. X. (2011). The steroid/peptide theory of social bonds: Integrating testosterone and peptide responses for classifying social behavioral contexts. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 36, 1265–1275. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.06.001.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Well, S., Kolk, A. M., & Oei, N. Y. L. (2007). Direct and indirect assessment of gender role identification. Sex Roles, 56, 617–628. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9203-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, Y.J., DeYoung, C.G., & Hirsh, J.B. (2011). Gender differences in personality across the ten aspects of the Big Five. Frontiers in Psychology. 2 Article 178, 1–10. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00178.

  • Weisstein, N. (1968). Kinder, Kuche, Kirche as scientific law: Psychology constructs the female. Boston: New England Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2009). Think women, think warm: Stereotype content activation in women with a salient gender identity, using a modified Stroop task. Sex Roles, 60, 247–260. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9526-z.

  • Whitley, B. E. (1983). Sex role orientation and self-esteem: A critical meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 765. doi:10.1007/BF00288048.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E. (1985). Sex-role orientation and psychological well-being: Two meta-analyses. Sex Roles, 12, 207–225. doi:10.1007/BF00288048.

  • Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.). (1996). The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, J. S., & Holzmuller, A. (1981). Further evidence on androgyny and interpersonal flexibility. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 67–80. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(81)90008-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, M. G., & Wood, W. (2010). Self-regulation of gendered behavior in everyday life. Sex Roles, 62, 635–646. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9761-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.699.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2009). Gender identity. In M. Leary & R. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 109–125). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A.H. (2010). Gender. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, 5th ed., pp. 629–667). Hoboken: Wiley.

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 55–123. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., Christensen, P. N., Hebl, M. R., & Rothgerber, H. (1997). Conformity to sex-typed norms, affect, and the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 523–535. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.523.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Michael Ohno and Isabel Gonzalez Pina for their help with the references.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendy Wood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wood, W., Eagly, A.H. Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity. Sex Roles 73, 461–473 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0480-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0480-2

Keywords

Navigation