Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 50, Issue 7–8, pp 583–591 | Cite as

Gender Role Orientation and Performance on Stereotypically Feminine and Masculine Cognitive Tasks

  • Dominik RitterEmail author
Article

Abstract

Nash (1979) argued that people tend to perform better on cognitive tasks when their gender-related self-concept is consistent with the stereotyping of the tasks. In order to evaluate Nash's hypothesis, participants were administered the S&M Mental Rotation Task, the Controlled Word Association Test, and the Bem (1974) Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). In men gender role orientation was significantly related to performance on the verbal task, with the critical factor being androgyny. When femininity and masculinity were assessed individually, femininity was found to be significantly related to the verbal task in men only. In women there was no significant variability across the gender role types in relation to performance on either task. These findings suggest that the importance of gender is dependent on the task and participants' sex. Nash's hypothesis was not supported for the mental rotation task.

gender role orientation Bem Sex Role Inventory S&M Mental Rotation Task Controlled Word Association Test 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

references

  1. Agnew, J., Bolla-Wilson, K., Kawas, C. H., & Bleecker, M. L. (1988). Purdue Pegboard age and sex norms for people 40 years old and older. Developmental Neuropsychology, 4, 29-35.Google Scholar
  2. Alain, M. (1987). A French version of the Bem Sex-role Inventory. Psychological Reports, 61, 673-674.Google Scholar
  3. Archer, J. (1987). Beyond sex differences: Comments on Borrill and Reid. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 40, 88-90.Google Scholar
  4. Baucom, D. H., Besch P. K., & Callahan, S. (1985). Relation between testosterone concentration, sex-role identity, and personality among females. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 48, 1218-1226.Google Scholar
  5. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.Google Scholar
  6. Bem, S. L., & Lewis, S. A. (1975). Sex role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 634-643.Google Scholar
  7. Berenbaum, S. A., & Hines, M. (1992). Early androgens are related to childhood sex-typed toy preferences. Psychological Science, 3, 203-206.Google Scholar
  8. Bernard, M. E., Boyle, G. J., & Jackling, I. (1990). Sex-role identity and mental ability. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 213-217.Google Scholar
  9. Boldizar, J. P. (1991). Assessing sex typing and androgyny in children: The Children's Sex Role Inventory. Developmental Psychology, 27, 505-515.Google Scholar
  10. Brosnan M. J. (1998). Spatial ability in children's play with Lego blocks. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 19-28.Google Scholar
  11. Caplan, P. J., MacPherson, G. M., & Tobin, P. (1985). Do sex-related differences in spatial abilities exist? American Psychologist, 40, 786-799.Google Scholar
  12. Casey, M. B., & Nuttall, R. L. (1990). Differences in feminine and masculine characteristics in women as a function of handedness: Support for the Geschwind/Galaburda theory of brain organization. Neuropsychologia, 28, 749-754.Google Scholar
  13. Chung, Y. B. (1996). The construct validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory for heterosexual and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 30, 87-97Google Scholar
  14. Dikmen, S. S., Heaton, R. K., Grant, I., & Temkin, N. R. (1999). Test-retest reliability and practice effects of Expanded Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 5, 346-356.Google Scholar
  15. Eals, M., & Silverman, I. (1994). The hunter-gatherer theory of spatial sex differences: Proximate factors mediating the female advantage in recall of object arrays. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 95-105.Google Scholar
  16. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., & Harmon, H. H. (1976). Manual for Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  17. Fontayne, P., Sarrazin, P., & Famose, J. P. (2000). The Bem Sex-Role inventory: Validation of a short version for French teenagers. European Review of Applied Psychology, 50, 405-416.Google Scholar
  18. Galea, L. A., & Kimura, D. (1993). Sex differences in route-learning. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 53-65.Google Scholar
  19. Hall, J. A., & Halberstadt, A. G. (1980). Masculinity and femininity in children: Development of the Children's Personal Attributes Questionnaire. Developmental Psychology, 16, 270-280.Google Scholar
  20. Halpern, D. F. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Hamilton, C. J. (1995). Beyond sex differences in visuo-spatial processing: The impact of gender trait possession. British Journal of Psychology, 86, 1-20.Google Scholar
  22. Herman, J. F., Kail, R. V. & Siegel, A. W. (1979). Cognitive maps of a college campus: A new look at freshman orientation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13, 183-186.Google Scholar
  23. Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Sex Roles, 39, 929-941.Google Scholar
  24. Huston, A. C. (1983). Sex-typing. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (pp. 387-467). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. James, T. W., & Kimura, D. (1997). Sex differences in remembering the locations of objects in an array: Location-shifts versus location-exchanges. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 155-163.Google Scholar
  26. Kelly, S. M. (1998). A comparative study of attitudes toward men, sex role attitudes, and relationship satisfaction with men of adult women. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 59(2-B), 0904.Google Scholar
  27. Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kohlberg, L. (1966). Moral education in the schools: A developmental view. School Review, 74 (1), 1-30.Google Scholar
  29. Laurella, V. B. (1997). Gender trait differences and nurse caring. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 57(7-B), 4299.Google Scholar
  30. MacLusky, N. J., & McEwen, B. S. (1980). Progestin receptors in the developing rat brain and pituitary. Brain Research, 189, 262-268.Google Scholar
  31. Mathiowetz, V., Rogers, S. L., Dowe-Keval, M., Donahoe, L., & Rennells, C. (1986). The Purdue Pegboard: Norms for 14-to 19-year-olds. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 40, 174-179.Google Scholar
  32. McEwen, B. S. (1981). Neural gonadal steroid actions. Science, 211, 1303-1311.Google Scholar
  33. McEwen, B. S., Davis, P. G., Parsons, B., & Pfaff, D. W. (1979). The brain as target for steroid hormone action. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 2, 65-112.Google Scholar
  34. McKeever, W. F. (1986). The influences of handedness, sex, familial sinistrality and androgyny on language laterality, verbal ability, and spatial ability. Cortex, 22, 521-537.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, L. K., & Santoni, V. (1986). Sex differences in spatial abilities: Strategic and experiential correlates. Acta Psychologica, 62, 225-235.Google Scholar
  36. Moore, S. M. (1985). The Children's Sex-role Test. Psychological Reports, 57, 586.Google Scholar
  37. Nash, S. C. (1979). Sex role as a mediator of intellectual functioning. In M. A. Wittig & A. C. Petersen (Eds.), Sex-related differences in cognitive functioning: Developmental Issues (pp. 263-302). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  38. Newcombe, N., & Dubas, J. S. (1992). A longitudinal study of predictors of spatial ability in adolescent females. Child Development, 63, 37-46.Google Scholar
  39. Nicholls, M. E. R., & Forbes, S. (1996). Handedness and its association with gender-related psychological and physiological characteristics. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 18, 905-910.Google Scholar
  40. Nyborg, H. (1988). Change at puberty in spatioperceptual strategy on the rod-and-frame test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 67, 129-130.Google Scholar
  41. Pearcey, S. M., Docherty, K. J., & Dabbs, J. M., Jr. (1996). Testosterone and sex role identification in lesbian couples. Physiology and Behavior, 60, 1033-1035.Google Scholar
  42. Phillips, R. (1979). Phillips S and M Test, Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
  43. Qubeck, W. J. (1997). Mean differences among subcomponents of Vandenberg's Mental Rotation Test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85, 323-332.Google Scholar
  44. Rao, S., Gupta, G. R., & Murthy, V. N. (1982) B.S.R.I. (A): An Indian adaptation of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Personality Study and Group Behavior, 2, 1-10.Google Scholar
  45. Resnick, S. M., Berenbaum, S. A., Gottesman, I. I., & Bouchard, T. J. (1986). Early hormonal influences on cognitive functioning in congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Developmental Psychology, 22, 191-198.Google Scholar
  46. Richardson, J. T. E. (1994). Gender differences in mental rotation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 435-448.Google Scholar
  47. Rowland, R. (1977). The Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Australian Psychologist, 12, 83-88.Google Scholar
  48. Ruble, T. L. (1983). Sex stereotypes: Issues of change in the 1970s. Sex Roles, 9, 397-402.Google Scholar
  49. Sands, K. A. (1998). Nonverbal fluency: A neuropsychometric investigation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 58(8-B), 4470.Google Scholar
  50. Schneider-Dueker, M., & Kohler, A. (1988). Die Erfassung von Geschlechtsrollen: Ergebnisse zur deutschen Neukonstruktion des Bem Sex-Role Inventory [Assessment of sex roles: Results of a German version of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory]. Diagnostica, 34, 256-270.Google Scholar
  51. Serbin, L. A., & Connor, J. M. (1979). Sex-typing of children's play preferences and patterns of cognitive performance. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 134, 315-316.Google Scholar
  52. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701-703.Google Scholar
  53. Siegel-Hinson, R. I., & McKeever, W. F. (2002). Hemispheric specialisation, spatial activity experience, and sex differences on tests of mental rotation ability. Laterality, 7, 59-74.Google Scholar
  54. Signorella, M. L., & Jamison, W. (1986). Masculinity, femininity, androgyny, and cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 207-228.Google Scholar
  55. Signorella, M. L., & Vegega, M. E. (1984). A note on gender stereotyping of research topics. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 107-109.Google Scholar
  56. Tracy, D. M. (1987), Toys, spatial ability, and science and mathematics achievement: Are they related? Sex Roles, 17, 115-138.Google Scholar
  57. Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations: A group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599-604.Google Scholar
  58. Van Wijk, C. M. T. G., & Kolk, A. M. (1996). Psychometric evaluation of symptom perception related measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 55-70.Google Scholar
  59. Weiss, R. W., & Russakoff, S. (1978). The sex role identity of male drug abusers. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 34, 1010-1013.Google Scholar
  60. Wilcox, C., & Francis, L. J. (1997). Beyond gender stereotyping: Examining the validity of the BEM Sex-Role Inventory among 16-to 19-year old females in England. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 9-13.Google Scholar
  61. Yanico, B. J. (1985). BSRI scores: Stability over four years for college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 277-283.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Central LancashirePrestonUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations