Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 51, Issue 3–4, pp 249–253 | Cite as

Exploring Normative Creativity: Testing the Relationship Between Cognitive Flexibility and Sexual Identity

  • Julie Konik
  • Mary Crawford
Note

Abstract

Brown (1989) proposed that lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals possess greater “normative creativity” and flexibility than heterosexuals because they have fewer norms for living in heterosexually dominated society. In this article we explore one possible individual difference between heterosexuals and nonheterosexuals in the domain of normative creativity by examining the relationship between cognitive flexibility and sexual identity among 358 university students. Participants with sexual identities not directed toward one gender exclusively (e.g., bisexual, biaffectionate, or queer) scored significantly higher on a measure of cognitive flexibility than did heterosexual and gay/lesbian participants; the latter two groups did not differ from each other. These results suggest that it is having a nonexclusive sexual identity, rather than a lesbian or gay identity, that is related to greater cognitive flexibility.

cognitive flexibility bisexuality homosexuality sexual identity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bayer, R. (1987). Homosexuality and American psychiatry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bohan, J. (1996). Psychology and sexual orientation: Coming to terms.New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, L. S. (1989).New voices, new visions: Toward a lesbian/gay paradigm for psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13 ,445–458.Google Scholar
  4. Carter, D. B. (1985). Relationships between cognitive flexibility and sex-role orientation in young adults. Psychological Reports, 57 ,763–766.Google Scholar
  5. Clunis, D. M., & Green, G. D. (1988). Lesbian couples.Seattle: Seal Press.Google Scholar
  6. Eliason, M. J. (1997). The prevalence and nature of biphobia in heterosexual undergraduate students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26 ,317–326.Google Scholar
  7. Firestein, B. A. (Ed.). (1996). Bisexuality: The psychology and politics of an invisible minority.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The Self-Reflection and Insight Scale: A new measure of private selfconsciousness.Social Behavior and Personality, 30 ,821–836.Google Scholar
  9. Herek, G. M. (2002). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66 ,40–66.Google Scholar
  10. Kim, B. S. K., Cartwright, B. Y., Asay, P. A., & D'Andrea, M. J. (2003). A revision of the Multicultural Awareness, Knowledge, and Skills Survey––Counselor edition. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 36 ,161–180.Google Scholar
  11. Kitzinger, C. (2001). Sexualities. In R. K. Unger (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender (pp. 272–285). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Konik, J., & Stewart, A. (2004). Sexual identity development in the context of compulsory heterosexuality. Journal of Personality, 22 ,815–844.Google Scholar
  13. Martin, M. M., & Anderson, C. M. (1998). The Cognitive Flexibility Scale: Three validity studies. Communication Reports, 11 ,1–9.Google Scholar
  14. Martin, M. M., Anderson, C. M., & Thweatt, K. S. (1998). Aggressive communication traits and their relationships with the Cognitive Flexibility Scale and the Communication Flexibility Scale. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13 ,531–540.Google Scholar
  15. Martin, M.M., & Rubin, R. B. (1995). A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological Reports, 76 ,623–626.Google Scholar
  16. Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  17. Schaie, K. W. (1955). A test of behavioral rigidity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51 ,604–610.Google Scholar
  18. Singelis, T. M., Hubbard, C., Her, P., & An, S. (2003). Convergent validation of the Social Axioms Survey. Personality and Individual Differences, 34 ,269–282.Google Scholar
  19. Troldahl, V. C., & Powell, F. A. (1965). A short-form dogmatism scale for use in field studies. Social Forces, 44 ,211–214.Google Scholar
  20. Walker, M. P., Liston, C., Hobson, A., & Stickgold, R. (2002). Cognitive flexibility across the sleep-wake cycle: REM-sleep enhancement of anagram problem solving. Cognitive Brain Research, 14 ,317–324.Google Scholar
  21. Wilson, R. C., Christensen, P. R., Merrifield, P. R., & Guilford, J. P. (1960). Alternate Uses, Form A: A manual of administration, scoring, and interpretation.Beverly Hills, CA: Sheridan Supply.Google Scholar
  22. Windle, M. (1986). Sex role orientation, cognitive flexibility, and life satisfaction among older adults. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10 ,263–273.Google Scholar
  23. Zinik, G. A. (1983). The relationship between sexual orientation and eroticism, cognitive flexibility, and negative affect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
  24. Zinik, G. A. (1985). Identity conflict or adaptive flexibility? Bisexuality reconsidered. Journal of Homosexuality, 11(1/2), 7–19.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of ConnecticutStorrs

Personalised recommendations