Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 24, Issue 9–10, pp 551–566 | Cite as

Gender role orientations and friendship: Some attenuation, but gender differences abound

  • Paul H. Wright
  • Mary Beth Scanlon
Article

Abstract

In an exploration of the degree to which gender role orientations would attenuate differences on a set of variables specified in a friendship model, 105 women and 101 men described themselves and their best friend of each gender on the Bem Sex Role Inventory. They also described their relationships with each friend using the Acquaintance Description Form F. Women's friendships with female friends were especially strong and rewarding as compared to their friendships with men, and as compared to men's friendships with either women or men. There was a modest attenuating effect due to subjects' GROs. Women, but not men, were sensitive to the perceived GROs of friends, with androgynous friends providing the strongest and broadest array of rewards. Contrary to the common conception of women's friendships as expressive and men's as instrumental, the results suggest that women's friendships are both expressive and instrumental.

Keywords

Attenuation Gender Difference Social Psychology Gender Role Good Friend 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aries, E. J., & Johnson, F. L. (1983). Close friendships in adulthood: Conversational content between same-sex friends. Sex Roles, 9, 1183–1196.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, R. R. (1981a). Worlds of friendship. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, R. R. (1981b). Friendships of women and men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 402–417.Google Scholar
  4. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 152–162.Google Scholar
  5. Bem, S. L. (1981). A manual for the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  6. Block, J. D. (1980). Friendship: How to give it, how to get it. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Booth, A. (1972). Sex and social participation. American Sociological Review, 37, 183–192.Google Scholar
  8. Booth, A., & Hess, E. (1974). Cross-sex friendship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 36, 38–47.Google Scholar
  9. Caldwell, M. A., & Peplau, L. A. (1982). Sex differences in same-sex friendships. Sex Roles, 8, 721–732.Google Scholar
  10. Davidson, S., & Packard, T. (1981). The therapeutic value of friendship between women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 495–510.Google Scholar
  11. Deaux, K. (1984). From individual differences to social categories: Analysis of a decade's research on gender. American Psychologist, 39, 105–116.Google Scholar
  12. Fischer, J. L., & Narus, L. R. (1981). Sex roles and intimacy in same and other sex relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 444–455.Google Scholar
  13. Hacker, H. M. (1981). Blabbermouths and clams: Sex differences in self disclosures in same-sex and cross-sex dyads. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 385–401.Google Scholar
  14. Hill, C. T., & Stull, D. E. (1981). Sex differences in effects of social and value similarity in same-sex friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 488–5052.Google Scholar
  15. Johnson, F. L., & Aries, E. J. (1983). The talk of women friends. Women's Studies International Forum, 6, 353–361.Google Scholar
  16. Lavine, L. O., & Lombardo, J. P. (1984). Self-disclosure: Intimate and nonintimate disclosures to parents and best friends as a function of Bem sex-role category. Sex Roles, 11, 735–744.Google Scholar
  17. Lea, M. (1989). Factors underlying friendship: An analysis of responses on the Acquaintance Description Form in relation to Wright's friendship model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 275–292.Google Scholar
  18. Lombardo, J. P., & Lavine, L. O. (1981). Sex-role stereotyping and patterns of self-disclosure. Sex Roles, 7, 403–411.Google Scholar
  19. McAdams, D. P., Healy, S., & Kraus, S. (1984). Social motives and patterns of friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 828–838.Google Scholar
  20. Rose, S. M. (1985). Same- and cross-sex friendships and the psychology of homosociality. Sex Roles, 12, 63–74.Google Scholar
  21. Rubin, L. (1985). Just friends. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  22. Sherrod, D. (1989). The influence of gender on same-sex friendships. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Close relationships. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Tognoli, J. (1980). Male friendship and intimacy over the life span. Family Relations, 29, 273–279.Google Scholar
  24. Underwood, B. J. (1957). Psychological research. new York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  25. Walker, L. S., & Wright, P. H. (1976). Self-disclosure in friendship. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 42, 735–742.Google Scholar
  26. Weiss, L., & Lowenthal, M. F. (1975). Life course perspective on friendship. In M. Thurnher & D. Chiriboga (Eds.), Four stages of life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  27. Williams, D. G. (1985). Gender, masculinity-femininity, and emotional intimacy in friendship. Sex Roles, 12, 587–600.Google Scholar
  28. Winstead, B. A. (1988). Sex differences in same-sex friendships. In V. J. Derlega & B. A. Winstead (Eds.), Friendship and social interaction. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Winstead, B. A., & Derlega, V. J. (1984). The therapeutic value of same-sex friendships. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  30. Wright, P. H. (1982). Men's friendships, women's friendships, and the alleged inferiority of the latter. Sex Roles, 8, 1–20.Google Scholar
  31. Wright, P. H. (1984). Self-referent motivation and the intrinsic quality of friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1, 115–130.Google Scholar
  32. Wright, P. H. (1985). The acquaintance description form. In S. Duck & D. Perlman (Eds.), Understanding personal relationships: an interdisciplinary approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Wright, P. H. (1988). Interpreting research on gender differences in friendship: A case for moderation and a plea for caution. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 367–373.Google Scholar
  34. Wright, P. H. (1989). Gender differences in adults' same- and cross-gender friendships. In R. G. Adams & R. Blieszner (Eds.), Older adult friendship: Structure and process. Newberry Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Wright, P. H., & Bergloff, P. J. (1984). The acquaintance description form and the study of relationship differentiation. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Personal Relationship, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  36. Wright, P. H., & Crawford, A. C. (1981). Agreement and friendship: A close look and some second thoughts. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 2, 52–69.Google Scholar
  37. Yoon, G. H. (1978). The natural history of friendship: Sex differences in best friendship patterns. Dissertation Abstracts, 39(3-B), 1553.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul H. Wright
    • 1
  • Mary Beth Scanlon
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of North DakotaGrand Forks
  2. 2.Ramsey ClinicHastings

Personalised recommendations