Advertisement

Sex Roles

pp 1–17 | Cite as

Men Pursuing an Undergraduate Psychology Degree: What’s Masculinity Got to Do with It?

  • David Marulanda
  • H. Lorraine Radtke
Original Article
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

Using discursive psychology as its theoretical and methodological framework, the present study explored male Canadian undergraduate students’ accounts of their reasons for studying psychology, their experiences of being male undergraduate psychology students, and their anticipated future careers. Ten men (19–29 years-old) who were at least in their second year of study in the psychology major program were interviewed. Contrary to survey research concluding that men who make gender-atypical vocational choices conform less to masculine norms than do men who make typical academic and career choices, our participants produced contradictory accounts. On the one hand, in talking about their experiences as psychology students in the context of the gender gap, they argued that gender does not matter. On the other hand, they showed that gender does matter in brief “boy moments” when they shared tacit gender knowledge with the interviewer and in justifying their academic paths toward futures that involved leaving psychology for a male-concentrated field. Thus, gender-does-not matter was the preferred argument when gender was an explicit topic of conversation, and the doing of gender occurred in unacknowledged ways.

Keywords

University students Discourse analysis Gender Masculinity Occupational choice 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The research project reported in this article was approved by the Conjoint Faculties Ethics Review Board of the University of Calgary.

Conflict of Interest

There is no potential conflict of interest associated with this research project.

References

  1. American Psychological Association, Committee on Women in Psychology. (2017). The changing gender composition of psychology: Update and expansion of the 1995 report. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/women/programs/gender-composition/index.aspx .
  2. American Psychological Association, Women’s Programs Office. (2006). Women in the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/women/resources/reports/index.aspx .
  3. Billig, M. (1991). Ideology and opinions: Studies in rhetorical psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Bolzendahl, C. I., & Myers, D. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974-1998. Social Forces, 83(2), 759–789.  https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2005.005.
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Breckler, S. (2012, March). What everyone needs to know about psychology. Psychological Science Agenda, 26(3). Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2012/03/about-psychology.aspx.
  8. Brown, B. (2009). Men in nursing: Re-evaluating masculinities, re-evaluating gender. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, 33(2), 120–129.  https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.2009.33.2.120
  9. Burke, P. J. (2011). Masculinity, subjectivity and neoliberalism in men’s accounts of migration and higher educational participation. Gender and Education, 23(2), 169–184.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09540251003674139.
  10. Burke, P. J. (2013). Formations of masculinity and higher education pedagogies. Culture, Society & Masculinities, 5(2), 109–126.  https://doi.org/10.3149/csm.0502.109.
  11. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Canadian Association of University Teachers. (2017). Almanac of post-secondary education. Retrieved from http://www.caut.ca/resources/almanac.
  15. Cech, E. A. (2013). The self-expressive edge of occupational sex segregation. American Journal of Sociology, 119(3), 747–789. doi: https://doi.org/10.1087/673969.
  16. Charles, M., & Bradley, K. (2009). Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries. American Journal of Sociology, 114(4), 924–976.  https://doi.org/10.1086/595942.
  17. Chrisler, J. C., & McHugh, M. C. (2011). Waves of feminist psychology in the United States: Politics and perspectives. In A. Rutherford, R. Capdevila, V. Undurti, & I. Palmary (Eds.), Handbook of international feminisms: Perspectives on psychology, women, culture, and rights (pp. 37–58). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Coates, J. (2007). Talk in a play frame: More on laughter and intimacy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 29–49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.05.003.
  19. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  20. Connell, R. W. (1996). Teaching the boys: New research on masculinity, and gender strategies for schools. Teachers College Record, 98(2), 206–235. http://222.tcrecord.org ID Number: 9614.
  21. Connell, R.W. (1998). Masculinities and globalization. Men and Masculinities, 1(1), 3–23.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639.
  22. Connell, R.W. (2000). The men and the boys. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  23. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859. 10.117/0891243205278639.Google Scholar
  24. Cross, S., & Bagilhole, B. (2002). Girls’ jobs for the boys? Men, masculinity and non-traditional occupations. Gender, Work and Organization, 9(2), 204–226.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0432.00156.
  25. Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 43–63.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174x.
  26. Deutsch, F. (2007). Undoing gender. Gender & Society, 21(1), 106–127.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243206293577.
  27. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Park, J. Y. (2014). An incomplete list of eminent psychologists of the modern era. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 2, 20–32.  https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000006.
  28. Dodson, T., & Borders, L. (2006). Men in traditional and nontraditional careers: Gender role attitudes, gender role conflict, and job satisfaction. The Career Development Quarterly, 54(4), 283–296.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2006.tb00194.x.
  29. Donnelly, K., & Twenge, J. M. (2017). Masculine and feminine traits on the Bem sex-role inventory, 1993-2012: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 76, 556–565.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0625-y.
  30. Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data: A guide for analysis (pp. 189–228). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1995). Men in perspective: Practice, power and identity. London: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  32. Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1997). Jockeying for position: The construction of masculine identities. Discourse Society, 8(2), 203–217.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008002004.
  33. Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1999). Imagined futures: Young men’s talk about fatherhood and domestic life. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38(2), 181–194.  https://doi.org/10.1348/014466699164112.
  34. Edley N, Wetherell M (2014) Roles, roots, and rifts: A rejoinder to Mahalik, Silverstein, and Hammond. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15(4), 375–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Edwards, D. (1997). Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24(2), 149–166.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243210361475.
  37. Evans, J., & Frank, B. (2003). Contradictions and tensions: Exploring relations of masculinities in the numerically female-dominated nursing profession. Journal of Men’s Studies, 11(3), 277–292.  https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1103.277.
  38. Gill, R. (2008). Culture and subjectivity in neoliberal and postfeminist times. Subjectivity, 25, 432–445.  https://doi.org/10.1057/subj.2008.28.
  39. Goodheart, C. D., & Markham, B. (1992). The feminization of psychology: Implications for psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 29(1), 130–138.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.29.1.130.
  40. Goyette, K. A., & Mullen, A. L. (2006). Who studies the arts and sciences? Social background and the choice and consequences of undergraduate field of study. Journal of Higher Education, 77(3), 497–538.  https://doi.org/10.1353/jh3.2006.0020.
  41. Haggbloom, S. J., Warnick, R., Warnick, J. E., Jones, V. K., Yarbrough, G. L., Russell, T. M., … Monte, E. (2002). The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. Review of General Psychology, 6(2), 139–152.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-26880.7.1.37.
  42. Hancock, A. N. (2012). ‘It’s a macho thing, innit?’ Exploring the effects of masculinity on career choice and development. Gender, Work and Organization, 19(4), 392–415.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2010.00547.x.
  43. Hare-Mustin, R. T. (2004). Can we demystify theory? Examining masculinity discourses and feminist postmodern theory. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 24(1), 14–29.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0091235.
  44. Harton, H. C., & Lyons, P. C. (2003). Gender, empathy, and the choice of the psychology major. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 19–24.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP3001_03.
  45. Heldner, M., & Edlund, M. (2010). Pauses, gaps and overlaps in conversations. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 555–568. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.002.
  46. Howard, A. (1987). The pendulum swings. APA monitor, 40.Google Scholar
  47. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kluczyńska, U. (2017). Motives for choosing and resigning from nursing by men and the definition of masculinity: A qualitative study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73(6), 1366–1376.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13240.
  49. Larkin, J., Andrews, A. & Mitchell, C. (2006). Guy talk: Contesting masculinities in HIV prevention education with Canadian youth. Sex Education, 6(3), 207–221.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1468181060083698.
  50. Leaper, C., & Van, S. (2008). Masculinity ideology, covert sexism, and perceived gender typicality in relation to young men’s academic motivation and choices in college. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 9(3), 139–153.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.9.3.139.
  51. Lemkau, J. P. (1984). Men in female-dominated professions: Distinguishing personality and background features. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 24, 110–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(84)90070-8.
  52. Levant, R. F. (2011). Research in the psychology of men and masculinity using the gender role strain paradigm as a framework. American Psychologist, 66(8), 765–776.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024624.
  53. Levant, R. F., & Richmond, K. (2007). A review of research on masculinity ideologies using the male role norms inventory. Journal of Men's Studies, 15(2), 130–146.  https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1502.130.
  54. Liben, L. S., Bigler, R. S., & Krogh, H. R. (2001). Pink and blue collar jobs: Children's judgments of job status and job aspirations in relation to sex of worker. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79(4), 346–363.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jeep.2000.2611.
  55. Lupton, B. (2000). Maintaining masculinity: Men who do ‘women’s work’. British Journal of Management, 11, S33–S48.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.11.s1.4.
  56. Lupton, B. (2006). Explaining men’s entry into female-concentrated occupations: Issues of masculinity and social class. Gender, Work and Organization, 13(2), 103–128.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2006.00299.x.
  57. Mahalik, J. R., Perry, J. C., Coonerty-Femiano, A., Catraio, C., & Land, L. N. (2006). Examining conformity to masculinity norms as a function of RIASEC vocational interests. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(2), 203–213.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072705283761.
  58. Martino, J. W. (2008). Male teachers as role models: Addressing issues of masculinity, pedagogy and the re-masculinization of schooling. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(2), 189–223.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2007.00405.x.
  59. McDonald, J. (2013). Conforming to and resisting dominant gender norms: How male and female nursing students do and undo gender. Gender, Work and Organization, 20(5), 561–579.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2012.00604.x.
  60. McDowell, J. (2015). Masculinity and non-traditional occupations: Men’s talk in women’s work. Gender, Work and Organization, 22(3), 273–291.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12078.
  61. Metzner, B. S., Rajecki, D. W., & Lauer, J. B. (1994). New majors and the feminization of psychology: Testing and extending the Rajecki-Metzner model. Teaching of Psychology, 21(1), 5–11.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2101_1.
  62. Mishkin, H., Wangrowicz, N., Dori, D., & Dori, Y. J. (2016). Career choice of undergraduate engineering students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 228, 222–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.033.
  63. National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). Table 318.30. Bachelor’s, master’s and doctor’s degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions, by sex of student and disciplinary division: 2014–15. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d16/tables/dt16_318.30.asp?current=yes.
  64. National Science Foundation. (2017). Table 15. Doctorate recipients, by sex and major field of study: 2005–15. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17306/data/tab15.pdf.
  65. O’Connor, T. (2015). Men choosing nursing: Negotiating a masculine identity in a feminine world. Journal of Men’s Studies, 23(2), 194–211.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826515582519.
  66. Ostertag, P. A., & McNamara, R. (1991). Feminization of psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15(3), 349–369.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00413.x.
  67. Päßler, K., & Hell, B. (2012). Do interests and cognitive abilities help explain college major choice equally well for women and men? Journal of Career Assessment, 20(4), 479–496.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072712450009.
  68. Perales, F. (2013). Occupational sex-segregation, human capital and wages: Evidence from Britain. Work, Employment and Society, 27(4), 600–620.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017012460305.
  69. Philipson, I. J. (1993). On the shoulders of women: The feminization of psychotherapy. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  70. Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  71. Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behavior. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  72. Pringle, R. (1993). Male secretaries. In C. L. Williams (Ed.), Doing ‘women’s work’: Men in non-traditional occupations (pp. 128–151). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  73. Pullen, A., & Simpson, R. (2009). Managing differences in feminized work: Men, otherness and social practice. Human Relations, 62(4), 561–587.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726708101989.
  74. Radtke, H. L. (2011). Canadian perspectives on feminism and psychology. In A. Rutherford, R. Capdevila, V. Undurti, & I. Palmary (Eds.), Handbook of international feminisms: Perspectives on psychology, women, culture, and rights (pp. 293–314). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  75. Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., & Moore, C. (2016). Do they stay or do they go? The switching decisions of individuals who enter gender atypical college majors. Sex Roles, 74(9–10), 436–449.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0583-4.
  76. Rogers, B. K., Sperry, H. A., & Levant, R. F. (2015). Masculinities among African American men: An intersectional perspective. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16(4), 416–425.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039082.
  77. Rustin, M. (2016). The neoliberal university and its alternatives. Soundings, 63, 147–176.  https://doi.org/10.3898/136266216819377057.
  78. Sampson, E.E. (1977). Psychology and the American ideal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 767–782.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.11.767.
  79. Sax, L. J., & Bryant, A. N. (2006). The impact of college on sex-atypical career choices of men and women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 52–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2005.01.004.
  80. Schuette, C. T., Ponton, M. K., & Charlton, M. L. (2012). Middle school children’s career aspirations: Relationship to adult occupations and gender. Career Development Quarterly, 60(1), 36–46.  https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2012.00004.x.
  81. Seal, A. (2018, June 8). How the university became neoliberal. The Chronical of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronical.com/article/How-the-University-Became/243622.
  82. Shen-Miller, D. S., Olson, D., & Boling, T. (2011). Masculinity in nontraditional occupations: Ecological constructions. American Journal of Men’s Health, 5(1), 18–29.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988309358443.
  83. Simpson, R. (2004). Masculinity at work: The experiences of men in female dominated occupations. Work, Employment and Society, 18(2), 349–368.  https://doi.org/10.1177/09500172004042773.
  84. Sinha, M. (2015). Canadian identity, 2013. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.Google Scholar
  85. Skinner, K., & Louw, J. (2009). The feminization of psychology: Data from South Africa. International Journal of Psychology, 44(2), 81–92.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00207590701436736.
  86. Taylor, S. (2005). Identity trouble and opportunity in women’s narratives of residence. Auto/Biography, 13, 249–265.  https://doi.org/10.1191/0967550705ab029oa.
  87. Taylor, C. J. (2010). Occupational sex composition and the gendered availability of workplace support. Gender & Society, 24(2), 189–212.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243209359912.
  88. Thornton, M. (Ed.). (2014). Through a glass darkly: The social sciences look at the neoliberal university. Canberra: Australian National University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Warming, K. (2005). Men working in women’s professions. CeLi – The Danish Research Centre on Gender Equality, Roskilde University.Google Scholar
  90. Weaver-Hightower, N. B. (2011). Male preservice teachers and discouragement from teaching. Journal of Men’s Studies, 19(2), 97–115.  https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1902.97.
  91. Weisgram, E. S., Dinella, L. M., & Fulcher, M. (2011). The role of masculinity/feminiity, values, and occupational value affordances in shaping men’s and women’s occupational choices. Sex Roles, 65, 243–258.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9998-0.
  92. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, 125–151.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002.
  93. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (2009). Accounting for doing gender. Gender & Society, 23, 112–122. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124320383266529.
  94. Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse & Society, 9(3), 387–412.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926598009003005.
  95. Wetherell, M. (2008). Subjectivity or psycho-discursive practices: Investigating complex intersectional identities. Subjectivities, 22, 73–81.  https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2008.7.
  96. Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1998). Gender practices: Steps in the analysis of men and masculinities. In K. Henwood, C. Griffin, & A. Phoenix (Eds.), Standpoints and differences: Essays in the practice of feminist psychology (pp. 156–173). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  97. Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Feminism & Psychology, 9(3), 335–356.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353599009003012.
  98. Wetherell, M., & Edley, N. (2014). Discursive psychology of men and masculinity. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 15(4), 355–364.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037148.
  99. Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., & Yates, S. J. (2001). Discourse as data: A guide for analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  100. Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39(3), 253–267. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213490232.
  101. Williams, C. L. (2013). The glass escalator, revisited. Gender & Society, 27(5), 609–629.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213490232.
  102. Willig, C. (2008). Introducing qualitative research in psychology. England: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  103. Wingfield, A. H., & Myles, R. L. (2014). Still a man's world? Revisiting men who do women's work. Sociology Compass, 8(10), 1206–1215.  https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12206

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Counselling Psychology, Werklund School of EducationUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations