Gender Psychology

Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially
constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man,
girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from
society to society and can change over time

Biological explanations of gender development

Biological sex is fundamentally a biological fact, referring to whether a person is genetically male or female.

It is assigned at birth based on the appearance of genitals, or at conception due to chromosome patterns.

The Role of Chromosomes

Everyone has 23 pairs of chromosomes in each cell of their body. One of these pairs is the sex chromosomes, which are crucial in establishing an individual’s biological sex.

• Females typically have XX chromosomes.
• Males typically have XY chromosomes.

The Y chromosome is particularly significant because it determines an individual’s sex. It carries a specific area called the Sex-Determining Region Y (SRY) gene.

This SRY gene triggers a chain of events from a very early stage in the embryo’s development, leading to the formation of the testes.

Without the SRY gene on a Y chromosome, the default development path is female, leading to the development of ovaries and the disintegration of male organs.

There is usually a direct link between an individual’s chromosomes and their external and internal reproductive organs.

---

The Role of Hormones

While chromosomes initiate the process, most biological sex development is governed by hormones.

Hormones are chemical messengers that travel in the bloodstream and are released prenatally and during adolescence (puberty), influencing biological development, brain, and anatomy.

Their effects are generally slower but longer-lasting than nerve impulses.

Testosterone:

This is a male sex hormone, also known as an androgen. While present in both sexes, it is found in significantly higher concentrations in males, typically around ten times more than in females.

• Role in Biological Sex: Testosterone begins its role early; the SRY gene on the Y chromosome triggers the development of testes (around seven weeks into development), which then start producing testosterone. During puberty, testosterone is responsible for the development of male secondary sexual characteristics, such as larger muscles, growth of facial and body hair, and a deepening of the voice.
• Role in Gender (Behavioural Influence): Testosterone is thought to be linked to increased levels of aggression and competitiveness often observed in males. For example, studies on male mice showed decreased aggression after castration (reducing testosterone) and a return of aggression when injected with testosterone.

Oestrogen:

This is the primary female sex hormone. While found in both males and females, it is present in much higher levels in females.

• Role in Biological Sex: Oestrogen plays a key role in the regulation of the menstrual cycle and the development of female secondary sexual characteristics, such as breast development and maturation of internal genitalia.
• Role in Gender (Behavioural Influence): Oestrogen is thought to have a behavioural influence on feelings of irritability and levels of cooperative behaviour. It is also associated with increased emotional response to others’ needs and caring behaviour, suggesting women are biologically predisposed to be primary attachment figures. The effects of oxytocin, for instance, are enhanced by oestrogen.

Oxytocin:

This hormone is generally produced in higher quantities in females, though during sex, it is produced in similar amounts in both males and females.

It is also known as the “love hormone” due to its role in promoting pair bonding.

• Role in Biological Sex/Behaviour: Oxytocin stimulates lactation in females and is thought to produce caring and attachment feelings, important for bonding with newborn babies during breastfeeding, and also in developing attachment in couples. The effects of oxytocin appear to be enhanced in females and suppressed by testosterone, which may allow for increased use of the “tend and befriend” response to stress in females.

---

Diversity in Sex Development

Diversity in sex development refers to conditions where an individual’s biological sex development varies from the typical XX/XY patterns, affecting their genetic, gonadal, or anatomical characteristics.

Psychologists study individuals who show diversity in sex development to understand biological influences on gender development.

Here are some examples of atypical sex chromosome patterns:

Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS)

Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS) is a rare genetic condition (affecting about 1 in 20,000 individuals) where the body is partially or completely insensitive to androgens, such as testosterone.

This insensitivity is usually caused by a dysfunction in the androgen receptor gene, affecting the development of a person’s genitals and reproductive organs.

Chromosomal Pattern

• Individuals with AIS have XY chromosomes (male chromosomal pattern).
• Despite this, the body does not fully or at all respond to testosterone, the hormone responsible for male sex development.

Physical Characteristics

• Genital appearance:
  • No external male genitalia may form.
  • The penis may be underdeveloped or absent.
  • Genitals may appear typically female or ambiguous.
• Reproductive organs:
  • No womb or ovaries are present.
  • Internal testes may be present but undescended.

Types of AIS

• Complete AIS (CAIS): The body does not respond to testosterone at all. Genitals appear fully female.
• Partial AIS (PAIS): The body partially responds to testosterone. Genital appearance varies—may be ambiguous or partially male.

Causes of AIS

• Genetic cause:
  • Due to a mutation in the androgen receptor gene.
  • The condition is inherited through the maternal line (X-linked inheritance).
  • Women who carry the gene are unaffected but have a 1 in 4 chance of passing AIS to their child.
• Hormonal causes:
  • Can also be influenced by:
    • Foetal insensitivity to androgens.
    • Maternal hormone exposure (e.g., from medications during pregnancy).

Case Study Example (Caribbean phenomenon):

A remote village in the Caribbean has observed girls “turning into boys” around age 13 for the past 50 years.

These children inherited a faulty gene that prevented their bodies from producing dihydrotestosterone in the womb, which is normally responsible for developing male external anatomy.

Their testes developed internally, but male external organs did not form until puberty when their bodies finally produced the vital chemical.

These children were raised as girls, performing traditional female tasks, but upon reaching puberty, they felt an urge to be male, became more muscular, and easily adjusted to male roles.

This suggests a strong biological influence on sex-role behaviour.

---

Klinefelter’s Syndrome

Klinefelter’s Syndrome (KS) is a chromosomal disorder specific to biological males.

A chromosomal disorder in which males are born with an extra X chromosome, resulting in
small testes, absence of sperm, enlarged breasts, intellectual developmental disorder and
behavioural differences. Not an inherited condition but occurring as a result of a random
event at cell division. Also called XXY syndrome.

Chromosomal Pattern and Cause

• Typical male chromosomes: XY
• Klinefelter’s pattern: XXY (an extra X chromosome)
• Cause: It is not inherited but results from a random event during cell division (nondisjunction), either before conception or in early embryonic development.

Physical Characteristics

Individuals with KS typically develop male physical traits but may show signs of reduced masculinity due to lower testosterone levels:

• Taller than average, with longer limbs
• Small testes and reduced fertility (often infertile)
• Little to no facial or body hair
• May develop breast tissue (gynecomastia)

Psychological and Cognitive Characteristics

KS can be associated with:

• Learning difficulties, particularly with reading and writing (e.g. dyslexia)
• Passivity in behavior
• Emotional sensitivity and, in some cases, aggressive outbursts
• Increased risk of mild intellectual disability or developmental delays
• Treatment and Support
• Testosterone therapy is the most common treatment. It can:
  • Promote more typically masculine physical traits (e.g. facial hair)
  • Improve energy levels, confidence, and mood
  • Help reduce passivity and support cognitive development
• Psychological and educational support can also be beneficial in managing learning or emotional challenges.

Why It Matters in Psychology [AO3)

Studying Klinefelter’s Syndrome helps researchers:

• Understand how chromosomal patterns influence sex and gender development
• Explore the nature vs. nurture debate —how biology interacts with environment and social perception
• Caution: Since KS is rare, we must be careful not to generalize findings to all individuals with the condition. Psychological traits may also stem from social experiences, such as how others respond to visible physical differences.

---

Turner’s Syndrome

Turner’s Syndrome (TS) is a chromosomal disorder specific to biological females.

Affects approximately 1 in 2,000 biological females, making it rarer than Klinefelter’s Syndrome.

A chromosomal disorder, specific to females, marked by the absence of all or a part of one of
the two X (female) chromosomes. The effects include gonadal dysgenesis (underdevelopment
or absence of primary and secondary sex characteristics- infertility and various other abnormalities (e.g. short stature, lack of menstruation). It is not an inherited condition, occurring instead as a random event during cell division in early fetal development.

Physical Characteristics

Turner’s Syndrome interferes with sexual development, often leading to gonadal dysgenesis—an underdevelopment of the reproductive system and secondary sex traits.

Common physical traits include:

• Shorter than average height
• Lack of menstruation and infertility
• Underdeveloped breasts and narrow hips
• Broad chest and webbed neck
• Immature appearance for age
• Misshapen or underdeveloped internal organs

Psychological Characteristics

TS is associated with a unique cognitive profile:

• Strong verbal skills, especially in language and reading
• Weaker visual-spatial skills compared to peers
• Tendency to be socially immature, possibly influenced by their physical appearance and how others treat them

Treatment and Implications

Psychological and medical research has led to effective hormone therapies, improving outcomes for individuals with TS:

• Oestrogen therapy during puberty can:
  • Stimulate breast development
  • Induce menstruation
  • Promote growth (often alongside growth hormone treatment)
• Early diagnosis and support are crucial for managing both physical and emotional development.

Why It Matters in Psychology [AO3)

• Nature vs. Nurture: TS provides a real-world example of how biological factors influence development, while also highlighting how social responses to physical traits can shape personality and behavior.
• Rethinking Gender Norms: Conditions like TS challenge binary models of sex and gender, encouraging psychologists to adopt more inclusive and nuanced perspectives.
• Support and Wellbeing: Understanding the psychological needs of individuals with TS helps inform ethical care, mental health support, and inclusive education.

⚠️ Important: Because TS is rare, it’s important not to overgeneralize findings. Some psychological traits may result not just from genetics but also from social experiences related to physical appearance and medical treatment.

---

Gender Identity

Psychologists distinguish between sex and gender.

• Sex: Biological attributes (e.g., chromosomes, hormones)
• Gender: Cultural and psychological meanings attached to sex, including:
  • Gender roles (social expectations): a relatively fixed, overly simplified concept of the attitudes and behaviours considered normal and appropriate for a male or female in a particular culture. Gender stereotypes often support the social conditioning of gender roles.
  • Gender identity (self-categorisation): a deeply felt, inherent sense of being a boy, a man, or male; a girl, a woman, or female; or a non-binary gender. This sense of self may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth. It is recognised that gender identity is influenced by both environmental and biological factors.

The psychological distinction between gender and sex highlights that someone’s gender identity may not necessarily match what is traditionally expected from their biological sex.

---

The Gender Binary

The concept of the gender binary is deeply ingrained in many cultures and societies, particularly Western ones.

• The gender binary is the belief that sex and gender exist in two fixed and mutually exclusive categories:
  • Male/female (sex)
  • Masculine/feminine (gender)
• This binary assumes that everyone fits neatly into one of these two categories, and that gender naturally follows from biological sex.

Biological Foundations of the Gender Binary

• The classification is often based on biological characteristics such as:
  • Reproductive organs
  • Chromosomes
  • Hormones
• This perspective supports the idea that “anatomy is destiny”, meaning your biology determines your gender and behaviour.

Cultural and Social Expectations

• In binary gender systems, individuals are expected to:
  • Conform to norms associated with their assigned gender at birth
  • Follow specific roles in language, clothing, behaviour, and social status
• These expectations shape:
  • How people see themselves
  • How others relate to them
  • Broader power structures and inequalities

The Gender Binary in Western Society

• The gender binary is deeply entrenched in Western cultures, acting as a foundation for many social systems, including:
  • Education
  • Employment
  • Healthcare
  • Law and media
• Many argue it is also a root cause of gender inequality.

Psychology’s Role in Reinforcing the Binary

• Historically, psychological research has:
  • Prioritised studies on gender differences
  • Framed sex and gender as biologically determined
  • Marginalised non-binary and gender-diverse experiences
• This has contributed to:
  • Research bias
  • Unconscious reinforcement of gender stereotypes
  • A limited understanding of gender as a spectrum

Challenging the Binary

• Those who do not conform to binary norms may face:
  • Social control, punishment, or discrimination
  • Pressure to fit into either “male” or “female” roles
• Increasingly, researchers, activists, and clinicians advocate for:
  • Recognising gender diversity
  • Viewing gender as fluid, socially constructed, and personally experienced

---

Support for the Gender Binary [AO3)

1. Chromosomes and Hormones (Biological Sex)

(Linked to specification content on biological sex)

• Biological sex is commonly defined by chromosomes (XX/XY) and sex hormones (testosterone, oestrogen, oxytocin).
• These biological markers are used to classify individuals as male or female.
• This perspective supports the idea that biological differences define gender, often summarised as:
  👉 “Anatomy is destiny.”

2. Biological Explanations of Gender Development

(Refer to specification content on chromosomes and hormones in gender development)

• Gender traits and behaviours are explained through biological sex differences.
  • E.g. Testosterone → linked to aggression, competitiveness
  • E.g. Oestrogen/oxytocin → linked to nurturing behaviour
• This reinforces the binary view that:
  • Males and females are fundamentally different
  • These differences are biologically driven, both physically and psychologically
• Research often cited:
  • Neuroanatomical differences between male and female brains
  • Maccoby and Jacklin (1974): Evidence of behavioural differences between sexes

3. Evolutionary Explanations

(Links to the evolutionary approach in psychology)

• Evolutionary theories argue that binary gender roles are adaptive:
  • Males → evolved to compete for mates (traits: aggression, risk-taking)
  • Females → evolved to nurture offspring (traits: caregiving, cooperation)
• Suggests men and women are biologically suited to different roles in society
  👉 Supports the idea of fixed gender roles across cultures and time

4. Legal and Social Systems

• Many legal systems and social structures are built on binary classifications:
  • Legal documents (e.g. passports, IDs) often require male/female categories
  • Policies, healthcare, education systems often assume a binary model
• This institutional framework:
  • Reinforces binary thinking
  • Makes it more difficult for non-binary or intersex individuals to be recognised or accommodated

---

Challenges to the Gender Binary [AO3]

1. Diversity in Biological Sex

• The sex binary assumes sex is dimorphic (two non-overlapping categories).
• Most people with:
  • XX chromosomes develop female traits
  • XY chromosomes develop male traits
• But research from biology, neuroscience, and neuroendocrinology challenges this:
  • Sex may exist on a spectrum, not as two fixed categories.
  • Examples:
    • People with mixed chromosome patterns (e.g. XX/XY mosaics)
    • Intersex individuals with ambiguous or mixed sex characteristics

Conclusion: Biological sex is more diverse than the binary model suggests.

2. Challenges to Biological Explanations of Gender

• Traditional views link gender traits to biology (e.g. hormones, brain structure).
• However, newer research shows:
  • Brains and hormones are not strictly male/female
  • Differences between genders are often small or inconsistent
• See Appendix A, Activity 3: The Gendered Brain

Conclusion: The idea that biology alone determines gender is overly simplistic.

3. Janet Shibley Hyde – The Gender Similarities Hypothesis

The gender binary model proposes that males and females are psychologically very different. This view dominates the media etc. (‘Men are from Mars; Women are from Venus’ type thinking).

Hyde puts forward a different perspective: the gender similarities hypothesis which maintains that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psychological variables. If men and women are more similar than different then it undermines the binary

Hyde’s work argues that males and females are more similar than different.

Her meta-analysis covered:

• Cognitive abilities
• Communication
• Personality traits (e.g. aggression, leadership)
• Wellbeing
• Motor behaviours
• Sexuality

Findings:

• 78% of gender differences were small or close to zero
• Notable exceptions:
  • Motor performance (e.g. throwing distance)
  • Physical aggression
  • Sexual behaviour/attitudes

Implications:

• Undermines binary thinking
• Challenges alpha bias (exaggeration of gender differences)
• Overemphasising difference (gender binary) could impact negatively by devaluing one gender
• over another, leading to stereotyping and discrimination.
• Highlights social sensitivity: research that reinforces gender stereotypes can cause real-world harm (e.g. in workplaces or education)

4. Sandra Bem – The Lenses of Gender

Sandra Bem’s work demonstrates how, through gender polarisation, the gender binary is strengthened and considers the impact that this has on the life of women.

Bem identified three lenses that uphold the gender binary and contribute to female disadvantage:

1. Biological Essentialism – gender differences are rooted in biology
2. Gender Polarisation – male and female roles are seen as opposites
3. Androcentrism – male experience is treated as the default

Key point: These lenses make social institutions appear neutral while actually reinforcing male dominance and inequality.

Further connections:

• Links to the nature vs. nurture debate
• Relevance to free will vs. determinism
• Discussion of androcentrism in psychological theory

---

Non-Binary Gender Identity

Non-binary identities challenge the traditional idea that gender consists of only two categories: male and female.

These identities exist outside, between, or beyond the gender binary.

Non-binary identities disrupt the idea that gender is fixed, binary, or solely based on biological sex.

Evidence from surveys, census data, academic research, and cross-cultural anthropology supports a more inclusive, non-binary understanding of gender.

• Monro (2019) describes “non-binary” as an umbrella term for those whose identity falls outside of or between male and female, at different times, or someone who does not experience or want to have a gender identity.
• While most of the population identifies as a woman or a man, approximately 1 in 250 people in the United Kingdom identified as non-binary in a representative survey by Glen and Hurrell (2012).
• According to the 2021 Census, approximately 30,000 people (0.06% of those aged 16 and over who answered) identified as non-binary, out of 262,000 (0.5%) who said their gender identity was different from their sex registered at birth.
• The existence of non-binary identities challenges the idea that gender is solely determined by biology.
• Globally, many cultures recognise gender identities beyond the binary system prevalent in many Western societies. Examples include:
  • Hijra in India: Many Hijras are born with male sexual characteristics but assume a religious role in Hindu culture, recognised as a third gender by India’s Supreme Court in 2014.
  • The Bugis people of South Sulawesi, Indonesia: They recognise multiple genders beyond the binary, such as Calalai (biological females presenting as masculine), Calabai (biological males adopting female roles without identifying as women), and Bissu (embodying both masculinity and femininity, holding spiritual roles).
  • Muxes in Oaxaca, Mexico: These are people assigned male at birth who dress and behave in ways associated with women, and their identity is accepted and included in the culture.
• These cross-cultural studies suggest that gender is fluid and shaped by cultural, economic, and social factors, rather than being solely biological. Thus, they directly challenge biological explanations of gender development.

Hijra (India)

• In India, the Hijra are the most common non-binary identity recognised today. Hijras have
  a long history in South Asia and are found in Hindu religious texts.
• Many hijras are born with male sexual characteristics.
• The hijra are underpinned by a unique culture, for example, they often leave home to join
  groups where they are educated in spirituality.
• Hijras assume a religious role in Hindu culture, celebrating rituals like weddings and births.
  There is a common belief that hijras possess the power to bless or curse others.
• In 2014, India’s Supreme Court recognised transgender people as a third gender.

The Bugis people: Calalai, Calabai, and Bissu (South Sulawesi)

• The Bugis people of South Sulawesi, Indonesia recognise a number of genders beyond the
  binary.
• Calalai: biological female who presents in what is traditionally considered to be masculine
  ways such as cutting their hair short and dressing in men’s clothes. They also take on a
  social position similar to men.
• Calabai: biological males who adopt a role similar to that traditionally occupied by women.
  They don’t identify as women, reject the restrictions that women experience, and do not
  have their sexual characteristics altered. Calabai often oversee weddings.
• Bissu, another gender, embodies the totality of masculinity and femininity. Bugis people
  believe that bissu surpass other genders, embodying a spiritual role. They perform
  spiritual rites, and they are believed to bridge the gap between this earthly world and the
  divine.

Muxes (Oaxaca, Mexico)

• In Mexico’s southern state of Oaxaca, there are three genders: female, male and muxe.
• There is acceptance of a third gender among the community and an inclusion of the
  identity in the culture and its traditions.
• A muxe is a person assigned male at birth who dresses and behaves in ways otherwise
  associated with women.
• Muxes have been celebrated since pre-Hispanic times and are not forced to adopt a binary
  world view.

4. Gender Fluid Identity

Gender fluid identity falls under the broader non-binary umbrella.

• It is an unfixed and dynamic identity, meaning a person’s gender expression, gender identity, or both, can change over time.
• Katz-Wise (2020) suggests that gender fluidity can be a way to explore gender before a more stable identity is established, or it can be a persistent state.
• Individuals expressing gender fluidity may do so through their clothing, makeup, hairstyles, voice, and choice of pronouns, with no single “one-size-fits-all” approach.
• Doyle (2022) found that non-binary adolescents may express more fluidity of their gender. In addition, the process of gender identity exploration and expression looks different for every individual and can evolve across an individual’s lifespan.
• Katz-Wise et al (2023) notes that there is limited research focusing exclusively on gender
• fluidity.
• This concept directly challenges the view that gender is binary and fixed. Cross-cultural studies of gender fluidity also challenge biological explanations of gender identity.

---

Measuring Gender Identity: The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI)

Sandra Bem (1974) developed the BSRI to measure gender identity, particularly focusing on the concept of psychological androgyny.

Key Concept: Androgyny

• Psychological androgyny: Possessing a balanced mix of both masculine and feminine traits
• Challenges the idea that individuals must be strictly masculine or feminine
• Bem argued that androgyny leads to greater adaptability and psychological health

Structure of the BSRI

• A self-report questionnaire with 60 items
• Participants rate how well traits describe them on a 7-point Likert scale
• The traits fall into three groups:
  • 20 masculine traits (e.g., assertive, independent)
  • 20 feminine traits (e.g., compassionate, gentle)
  • 20 neutral traits (e.g., reliable, helpful)

Scoring and Classifications

Based on responses, individuals are scored along masculinity and femininity dimensions and classified into one of four categories:

Classification	Description
Androgynous	High in both masculine and feminine traits
Masculine	High masculine, low feminine
Feminine	High feminine, low masculine
Undifferentiated	Low in both masculine and feminine traits (added later)

Research Findings

• In Bem’s original study:
  • 34% of males and 27% of females were classified as androgynous
  • Most participants were sex-typed (i.e., matched their gender with traditional traits)
• Prakash et al. (2010): Found androgynous women in India had better mental health outcomes (e.g. lower depression)

Limitations of the BSRI [AO3)

• Oversimplification: The BSRI score may oversimplify a person’s gender experience, as gender expression can change depending on context (e.g., work vs. family).
• Temporal Validity: Developed in 1974, the BSRI may be outdated due to changes in societal gender roles and understanding. Some traits classified as feminine (e.g., “childlike” and “gullible”) may no longer be considered appropriate or relevant.
• Sampling Bias: The original BSRI was created using Western students, which may limit its generalisability to older age groups or other cultures.
• Challenging Findings: Some research, like that by Adams and Sherer, found that masculine males and females appeared to be better adjusted on measures like assertiveness and self-efficacy, which contradicts Bem’s claim that androgyny is always most beneficial.

---

Cognitive explanations of gender development

Cognitive explanations of gender development focus on how children’s thinking processes and understanding of gender develop as they grow.

The cognitive approach in psychology generally studies internal mental processes such as memory, perception, attention, and reasoning.

It proposes that information received from our senses is processed by the brain, and this processing directs our behaviour.

Cognitive theories are considered “active processes” because children actively process information and mature in their mental consideration of gender.

Kohlberg’s Theory of Gender Constancy

Lawrence Kohlberg (1966) proposed a cognitive-developmental theory to explain gender development, suggesting that children can only learn gender-appropriate behaviours once they understand that gender is constant and unchangeable.

This understanding develops gradually through a series of maturational stages, meaning children progress through these stages at different speeds but always in the same order.

Kohlberg’s theory, like other cognitive theories, is considered a nomothetic approach because it focuses on establishing theories of information processing that apply to all people.

Kohlberg’s theory outlines three stages of gender understanding:

1. Gender Identity / Gender Labelling (Age 2-3):

• At this stage, children learn to identify their own gender (e.g., “I am a boy” or “I am a girl”) and can also recognise others as male or female.
• However, this understanding is basic and often based solely on physical appearance; for example, a boy wearing a skirt might be identified as a “girl”.
• Children at this stage are not yet aware that gender is a permanent state.

2. Gender Stability (Age 3-7):

In this stage, children learn that their own gender is fixed over time – males stay male and females stay female.

However, they still do not understand that gender remains the same across situations.

For instance, they might believe that a boy acting like a girl could “turn into one”.

3. Gender Constancy (Age 7-12):

Children at this stage fully understand gender and realise that it remains constant regardless of changes in appearance (like short hair on a girl) or behaviour.

This understanding is related to the concept of conservation, where a child understands that gender stays the same even when appearances change.

According to Kohlberg, it is at this stage that children are truly ready to learn about gender-appropriate behaviours and actively seek out same-sex role models to imitate.

Research Support for Kohlberg’s Theory [AO3]

Slaby & Frey (1975):

This research provided support for Kohlberg’s stages.

Children aged 2 were able to correctly identify their own gender when shown pictures.

However, they couldn’t correctly answer questions like “Were you a little boy or little girl when you were a baby?” or “Will you grow up to be a mummy or daddy?” until ages 3 or 4.

This suggests an increasing understanding of gender stability with age.

Furthermore, children who had achieved gender consistency (in the later stages) spent more time watching films of same-sex models than opposite-sex models, indicating a preference to learn gender-appropriate behaviours from those they identify with

Thompson (1975):

This study found that by two years old, children could select pictures of same-sex children, demonstrating an ability to self-label and identify others’ gender.

This ability increased with age, with 76% of two-year-olds showing correct gender identity compared to 90% of three-year-olds, supporting Kohlberg’s idea that understanding gender increases with age.

Cross-Cultural Universality:

Research has indicated that Kohlberg’s stages of gender development appear to be universal across cultures.

This suggests that the progression through these stages is a fundamental aspect of cognitive development, rather than being solely dependent on specific cultural influences.

Criticisms and Limitations of Kohlberg’s Theory [AO3)

1. Underestimation of Age

• Kohlberg claimed gender constancy develops around age 6–7.
• Slaby and Frey (1975): Found signs of gender constancy as early as age 5.
• Martin and Little (1990): Found that children under age 4—who lacked gender stability/constancy—still showed strong gender stereotyping.

Challenge: Suggests gendered behaviour begins before constancy is achieved, contradicting Kohlberg’s assumptions.

2. Gender Differences Ignored (Beta Bias)

• Kohlberg’s theory assumes boys and girls develop similarly—an example of beta bias.
• However, research suggests:
  • Boys tend to show gender consistency earlier.
  • Boys are more rigid about gender roles and less likely to engage in cross-gender behaviour.
• Social Learning Theory explains this as due to:
  • Stronger reinforcement and punishment
  • Male role models being seen as more powerful
• Gilligan (1977): Criticised Kohlberg’s male-only sample and argued it reflects a male bias (focus on justice over care).

3. Descriptive, Not Explanatory

Kohlberg’s theory describes stages of gender development but does not explain:

• Why children move from one stage to the next
• What drives the cognitive changes (e.g., social, biological, environmental factors)

Methodological Issues

• Kohlberg’s research involved young children (ages 2–3) in interviews.
• Critics argue:
  • Young children may lack the verbal skills to express complex gender understanding.
  • This could lead to underestimation of their actual cognitive abilities.

Comparison with Gender Schema Theory (GST)

Martin and Halverson (1981) proposed Gender Schema Theory:

• Children begin forming gender schemas as early as age 2–3.
• They start organising information and forming stereotypes much earlier than Kohlberg suggested.

Key Difference:

• GST sees gender identity as the starting point of gendered behaviour.
• Kohlberg sees gender constancy as the prerequisite.

---

Martin and Halverson’s Gender Schema Theory

An alternative cognitive explanation for gender development is the Gender Schema Theory (GST), proposed by Martin and Halverson (1981).

This theory suggests that children begin to process gender-related information through schemas much earlier than Kohlberg proposed, specifically around the time they acquire basic gender identity (around age 2 or 3), and they do not need to understand gender constancy for this to happen.

Schemas

A schema is a mental framework of beliefs and expectations that influence cognitive processing and contain our understanding of an object, a person, or an idea.

Schemas help us to organise and interpret information quickly and effectively, preventing us from being overwhelmed by environmental information.

In the context of gender, gender schemas are organised sets of information about gender-appropriate behaviour, including what toys are appropriate for each gender, what clothes to wear, and so on.

Children learn these schemas from their interactions with people and from sources like TV shows and videos, as they are closely related to cultural norms.

In-group/Out-group Schemas

A key feature of GST is the development of in-groups and out-groups.

The “in-group” refers to the gender the child identifies with (e.g., boys for a boy), while the “out-group” refers to the opposite gender.

Children are most interested in and concentrate on observing and learning the behaviours appropriate for their own gender (in-group schemas) and tend to avoid behaviours that belong to out-group schemas.

They may even tease peers who play with the opposite sex, thereby reinforcing gendered norms.

Self-Socialisation

Children actively seek out and learn about gender-appropriate behaviours and roles from their interactions with people, such as what toys are appropriate for each gender and what clothes to wear.

Once they have a basic gender identity and schemas, they become ready to guide their own “self-socialisation”

Selective Attention and Confirmatory Bias:

Children tend to pay attention to, and remember, information that is consistent with their developing gender schemas.

They ignore any information that is not consistent with their in-group information.

For example, if a boy sees a male nurse, this information is likely to be ignored because the man is not behaving consistently with the boy’s existing in-group schema, and thus the schema does not alter.

This is known as confirmatory bias.

AO3

Sandra Bem’s Contribution to Gender Schema Theory:

Sandra Bem, a feminist psychologist, further developed the concept of gender schemas.

She proposed that children are “pre-programmed” to organise information in terms of schemas, and she saw gender schemas as the “lenses” through which people view the world.

• Androgyny and Cognitive Style: Bem (1983) suggested that the difference between an androgynous person and a traditionally sex-typed person is one of cognitive style.
  • An androgynous person (someone possessing a balanced mix of masculine and feminine traits) responds to situations independently of any rigid gender concepts. This flexibility is believed to lead to greater psychological health and less anxiety.
  • In contrast, a traditionally sex-typed person determines what would be appropriate for their gender, therefore heavily relying on gender schemas.
• Bem suggested that children can be categorised as gender-schematic (perceiving information that reflects stereotypes) or gender non-schematic (having a more androgynous schema).

Research Support for Gender Schema Theory:

• Martin and Halverson (1983): This study showed children pictures of males and females in both gender-consistent roles (e.g., male firefighters) and gender-inconsistent roles (e.g., male nurses or female sawing wood). Children under six recalled more of the gender-consistent ones than the gender-inconsistent ones, often switching the gender of the person to match the activity when recalling. This suggests that children’s existing gender schemas influenced their memory and recall, supporting the idea that schemas organise memory.
• Martin (1995): This research found that 4-5 year olds would much prefer playing with toys that were said to be for their own gender. This indicates that children apply their gender schemas to guide their toy preferences early on.
• Liben & Signorella (1993): This study showed children films of adults doing stereotypical opposite-sex activities (e.g., a male nurse) and found that children were more likely to completely forget seeing this than more stereotypical activity. This highlights the confirmatory bias, where children only really notice information which supports the gender stereotypes they are learning.
• Martin and Little (1990): This is crucial evidence directly challenging Kohlberg’s theory. It was found that children under the age of four, who showed no signs of gender stability let alone gender constancy, still exhibited strong signs of gender stereotyping about what boys and girls are permitted to do. This suggests that knowledge about gender-appropriate behaviour develops well before Kohlberg’s constancy stage.

Criticisms and Limitations of Gender Schema Theory:

• Lack of Explanation for Schema Acquisition: A notable criticism is that the theory doesn’t fully explain how schemas are acquired in the first place. While it describes how children use and organise information, it doesn’t detail the initial learning process that leads to the formation of these schemas.
• Vagueness of Concept: The notion of schemas itself is sometimes criticised as a vague concept, making it difficult to precisely measure or observe their formation and influence.
• Determinism vs. Flexibility: While the theory suggests schemas influence behaviour, it doesn’t always hold true in reality. For instance, couples with strong views about sex equality may still operate under stereotyped sex roles, challenging the idea that attitude (schema) always determines behaviour.
• Underemphasis on Biological Factors: GST, being a cognitive theory, focuses heavily on mental processes and environmental learning, but it may underplay the role of biological factors in gender development.
  • Alexander and Hines (2002): This study on vervet monkeys found sex-typed toy preferences (males preferred cars, females preferred dolls) even without prior experience or human-like socialisation. This suggests that gendered toy preference may be biological rather than solely due to schema development.
  • Universal Gender Differences: The existence of widespread, universal gender differences across cultures (e.g., men being more aggressive and competitive, women more cooperative and caring) suggests a biological element not fully captured by schema theory alone.
• Incomplete Explanation: Like Kohlberg’s theory, GST describes how gender understanding develops cognitively, but it may not fully explain why these processes occur or account for the full complexity of gender development, which is also influenced by social learning and psychodynamic factors.

Comparison of Kohlberg’s Theory and Gender Schema Theory

Feature	Kohlberg’s Theory	Gender Schema Theory (Martin & Halverson)
Type of Theory	Cognitive-developmental	Cognitive-schema theory
Age of Onset	Gender understanding develops in stages, with gender constancy at ~age 7	Gender schemas form much earlier, around age 2–3 (after basic gender identity)
Prerequisite for Behaviour	Gender constancy is required before learning gender-appropriate behaviours	Gender identity alone is sufficient; constancy is not required
Developmental Mechanism	Follows maturational stages: identity → stability → constancy	Involves active construction of schemas from social input
View of the Child	Passive until cognitive maturity allows constancy	Active learner from early age, seeking gendered information
Behavioural Guidance	Children behave according to gender after achieving constancy	Behaviour is shaped early on by in-group schemas and selective attention
Handling Schema-Inconsistent Info	Not specifically addressed	Children ignore or distort schema-inconsistent information (confirmatory bias)
Explanation of Fixed Gender Attitudes	Less detailed	Explains rigid attitudes via schema reinforcement and bias

• Emphasis: Both theories focus on cognition as central to gender development, emphasizing that children actively construct their understanding of gender.
• Timing of Gender-Appropriate Behaviour: Kohlberg’s theory claims that children only become ready to learn about gender-appropriate behaviours after achieving gender constancy, typically around age 7. In contrast, Gender Schema Theory suggests that children begin to develop gender schemas and show gender-stereotyped preferences much earlier, around age 2 or 3, as soon as they have a basic gender identity.
• Requirement of Constancy: Kohlberg believes that understanding gender constancy is a prerequisite for learning gender-appropriate behaviours. Martin and Halverson, however, argue that children do not need to understand constancy for this process to happen, as gender schemas form much earlier.
• Cause of Gender Identity/Behaviour: Kohlberg suggests that gender consistency leads to gender-appropriate behaviour (“My gender isn’t going to change, so I should start behaving like a boy”). GST proposes that gender identity leads to seeking out information about how one’s gender is supposed to behave (“I’m a boy, so I should find out how boys are supposed to behave”).

Mechanism of Development

Kohlberg’s Theory:

• Gender development follows a maturational sequence.
• Children progress through three fixed cognitive stages:
  1. Gender Identity (around age 2–3): Recognising oneself as male or female.
  2. Gender Stability (around age 4): Understanding that gender is stable over time.
  3. Gender Constancy (around age 6–7): Realising that gender remains consistent across situations, even if appearance changes.
• Only after reaching gender constancy do children begin to adopt gender-appropriate behaviours.

Martin and Halverson’s Gender Schema Theory (GST):

• Emphasises active learning and cognitive organisation from an early age.
• As soon as children develop basic gender identity (around age 2–3), they:
  • Start forming gender schemas based on cultural and social input.
  • Categorise behaviours, roles, and preferences into in-group (own gender) and out-group (other gender) schemas.
  • Use these schemas to guide attention, memory, and behaviour.
• Children tend to ignore or distort information that doesn’t match their existing schemas (confirmatory bias).
• Explains the rigidity of gender attitudes as schemas become reinforced and resistant to change.

---

Social learning theory

Social Learning Theory proposes that gender identity and roles are a collection of behaviours learned from the environment .

It suggests that much of human learning, including gender-related behaviours, happens indirectly through observing others, not just through direct experience.

SLT acknowledges the influence of the environment and role models in shaping behaviour, and also incorporates cognitive processes (thoughts) that occur between a stimulus and a response.

1. Modelling

Modelling, or observational learning, is a key way gender behaviours are learned .

A model is an individual who exhibits certain behaviours in a given situation, providing examples for observers to potentially imitate.

Children learn gender roles by observing people around them, such as parents, peers, and even symbolic models like characters in the media “.

Several factors make it more likely that a child will imitate a model’s behaviour:

• Attention: The individual must pay attention to the behaviour and its consequences “.
• Retention: The observed behaviour needs to be stored in long-term memory so it can be reproduced later; imitation isn’t always immediate “.
• Motor Reproduction: The observer must have the ability and skills to reproduce the observed behaviour “.
• Motivation: Individuals must expect to receive the same positive reinforcement (vicarious reinforcement) that they’ve seen the model receive “.
• Identification: Observers are more likely to imitate a model if they identify with them . Identification occurs when an observer associates themselves with a role model and wants to be like them. Key factors that increase identification include shared characteristics like being the same sex or similar age, and the model having high status or being attractive and likeable . Boys, for instance, are more likely to imitate same-sex models than girls, and boys often imitate more physically aggressive acts than girls “.
• Vicarious Reinforcement: This is crucial in observational learning . If a child observes a model being rewarded for a behaviour, they are more likely to imitate it. Conversely, if they see the model punished, they are less likely to copy that behaviour . This “second-hand” learning means the learner does not directly receive the reward or punishment, but the observed consequence influences their future behaviour. For example, seeing someone succeed raises one’s belief in their own capabilities (self-efficacy), while the failure of similar others decreases it `.

Parents and peers act as socialising agents, modelling examples of appropriate and inappropriate behaviour, and also the consequences of conforming or not conforming to gender norms .

For example, Bandura’s Bobo doll experiments demonstrated that children spontaneously imitate the behaviour of an aggressive model without obvious reinforcement, and that children can be strongly influenced by violence on TV and in cinema.

2. Direct Tuition

Direct tuition involves explicit instruction and direct reinforcement regarding appropriate gender behaviour .

This is distinct from indirect or vicarious learning, as it involves a direct response from socialising agents (like parents or teachers) to a child’s actions.

• Direct Reinforcement: Children may be directly rewarded for acting in gender-appropriate ways and punished or ignored for gender-inappropriate behaviour . For instance, parents might encourage feminine behaviour in daughters by complimenting their appearance in a dress, or discourage sons from playing with dolls by telling them they look “soft”. This direct feedback reinforces stereotypical behaviour, often unconsciously on the part of the parents “.
• Instructions: This mode involves being explicitly told how to behave or what is expected, such as “boys being told not to play with Barbie” . Research by Martin et al. (1995) suggested that direct tuition, like boys playing with toys labelled “boys’ toys,” might be more important in preschool children than just modelling.

---

Influence of Parents on Gender Roles

SLT posits that gender roles develop because boys and girls are treated differently by their parents. Parents use rewards and punishments to encourage gender-appropriate behaviour.

For example, they might praise daughters for looking pretty in a dress or discourage sons from playing with dolls.

A study by Smith and Lloyd (1978) demonstrated this unconscious parental influence57. Mothers were videotaped playing for 10 minutes with a 6-month-old baby (not their own).

The babies were dressed and named as either a boy or a girl, regardless of their actual sex.

Seven toys were available, including masculine (squeaky hammer, stuffed rabbit in trousers), feminine (doll, squeaky bambi), and neutral toys.

The results showed that mothers encouraged more motor activity and offered gender-appropriate toys if they thought they were playing with a boy.

They were also more prepared to let the “girl” play with boys’ toys, but not the “boy” play with girls’ toys.

This suggests that mothers reinforced stereotypical behaviour based on perceived gender, often without realizing it.

---

Influence of Peers on Gender Roles

Peers serve as role models for gender-role stereotypes, making children more likely to imitate same-sex models.

Gender differences are more pronounced in social situations like peer settings.

Children soon show preferences for same-gender playmates and form predominantly same-gender groups, resisting interactions with the opposite gender. Peers reinforce gender stereotypes by praising gender-appropriate behaviour and ridiculing non-appropriate behaviour, being intolerant of cross-gender behaviour (e.g., boys playing with girls).

• Bussey and Bandura (1992) found that 3-year-old children disapproved of gender-role inconsistent behaviour, such as girls playing football. However, 4-year-olds not only disapproved but also showed self-critical feelings about playing with gender-role inconsistent toys.
• Archer and Lloyd (1982) reported that 3-year-olds playing opposite-sex games were ridiculed by their peers and later shunned.

---

Influence of Culture on Gender Roles

Studying cultural influences helps psychologists understand the relative contributions of nature (biology) and nurture (socialisation) to gender developmen

If gender roles varied significantly across cultures, it would suggest socialisation is a key factor, whereas similarities would point to biological influences.

• Margaret Mead (1935): Her studies of social groups in Papua New Guinea showed significant cultural variation in gender roles.
  • The Arapesh men and women were found to be gentle, responsible, and cooperative.
  • The Mundugumor men and women were violent and aggressive.
  • The Tchambuli had reversed gender role differences, where women were dominant, impersonal, and managerial, while men were emotionally dependent.
  • The fact that human communities can vary so radically suggests gender roles are a product of culture and learned via socialisation, rather than solely a fundamental biological process.
• Williams & Best (1990a): This study tested 2,800 students in 30 different countries and found evidence of cultural similarities in gender stereotypes. Men were broadly seen as more dominant, aggressive, and autonomous, while women were seen as more nurturing and interested in affiliation. This suggests universal stereotypes about gender exist.
• Cultural Norms and Transmission: Social learning principles account for how cultural norms are transmitted through particular societies, influencing how children understand their gender role. Each culture’s exact gender stereotypes are distinct and passed down each generation through socialisation by peers, teachers, and parents.
• Changing Gender Roles: The fact that gender roles in modern culture are becoming less strict and can change dramatically within a generation (e.g., decreasing gender gap, gender-neutral toys, encouragement of girls in STEM) suggests that gender is socially constructed and transmitted through socialisation, not fixed by biology.

---

Influence of Media on Gender Roles

The media is a significant source of social learning, often portraying and reinforcing gender stereotypes through symbolic models.

• Stereotypical Portrayals: Television, films, books, and advertisements often portray males and females in gender-stereotypical ways. Males are frequently perceived as more dominant, aggressive, and independent, while women are seen as submissive, nurturing, and dependent.
• Vicarious Reinforcement: The media does more than simply model gender-typical behaviours; it also provides information about the likely outcomes of those behaviours for males and females. Seeing people similar to oneself succeed (e.g., becoming successful or popular) raises a person’s belief in their own capabilities (self-efficacy), increasing the likelihood of imitation.
• Research Evidence:
  • Hodges et al (1981): Found that men are more likely to be portrayed as being in control, while women are often at the mercy of others.
  • McGhee & Frueh (1980): Showed that children exposed to such models on TV display far more stereotyped behaviours.
  • Manstead and McCulloch (1981): Observed TV ads and recorded the roles of central adult figures, noting gendered portrayals.
  • Furnham and Mak (2000)/Furnham and Farragher (2000): Studies across 11 countries found clear patterns of sex-role stereotyping in adverts. Women were often shown in dependent roles (parent/spouse), in the home, and as product users, while men were shown in professional roles, outside the home, and as authorities on products. This suggests the media reinforces gender roles by providing symbolic models.
• Policy Implications: Concerns about media’s influence have led to real-world actions. For example, in 2008, the European Parliament passed a resolution requesting member states to avoid stereotypical portrayals of males and females on TV, based on evidence that such portrayals reinforce narrow gender roles and limit life choices, especially for women
• Mirroring vs. Shaping: Eisend’s research (gathering 64 studies on gender stereotyping in ads) found that while gender roles were highly stereotypical, the data also indicated ads were becoming less stereotypical. Eisend argued that this reduction was due to changes in the society where the adverts were shown, suggesting media simply mirrors cultural stereotypes rather than moulding them through social learning. The media also sometimes praises examples of non-gender conformity, like Elton John and David Bowie.

---

Criticisms and Limitations of Social Learning Theory as Applied to Gender Development

1. Underemphasis on Biological Factors: SLT is often criticised for its strong emphasis on nurture, potentially underestimating innate biological influences on gender.
   • Universal Gender Differences: The existence of widespread, universal gender differences across cultures (e.g., men more aggressive and competitive, women more cooperative and caring) suggests a biological element not fully explained by SLT alone.
   • Alexander and Hines (vervet monkeys): Found sex-typed toy preferences (males preferred cars, females preferred dolls) in vervet monkeys, even without prior experience or human-like socialisation. This suggests gendered toy preference may be biological rather than solely due to social learning and schema development.
2. Difficulty Explaining Atypical Gender Development: SLT struggles to explain why individuals would display cross-sex gendered behaviour (e.g., gender dysphoria) when societal pressures punish such non-conformity and constantly show gender-normative behaviour as rewarding. The fact that people do display atypical gender development despite social pressure may be better explained by biological explanations.
3. Lab Studies and Validity: Many SLT studies, including Bandura’s Bobo doll experiments, were conducted in laboratory settings. While they allow for control and cause-and-effect conclusions, they may suffer from demand characteristics (participants behaving as expected) and lack mundane realism, questioning their generalisability to real-life situations.
4. Nature vs. Nurture / Determinism: While Bandura later introduced ‘reciprocal determinism’ (where individuals also influence their environment through chosen behaviours), suggesting some element of choice, SLT is still heavily weighted on the nurture side of the debate. Critics argue it implies that our choices are still heavily conditioned by observation, leading to a softer form of determinism rather than full free will.
5. Incomplete Explanation: SLT describes how gender behaviour is learned and maintained but does not fully explain how schemas are acquired initially or why these learning processes occur. It also tends to assume gender learning happens “all at once” rather than explaining gender as a developmental process that occurs gradually with age.
6. Researcher Bias in Cross-Cultural Research: Mead’s cross-cultural research, while influential, has been criticised for potential researcher bias, as observers may perceive things differently to indigenous people or participants may provide answers they believe the researcher wants to hear (social desirability bias).
7. Difficulty Determining Cause and Effect for Media Influence: The pervasive presence of media in modern society makes it difficult to isolate its true influence on gender development from other socialising factors, as a clear control group is often absent. Much of the evidence linking media exposure to gender roles is correlational, which does not prove causation.
8. Temporal Validity: Some aspects of sex-role stereotypes and the tools used to measure them (e.g., Bem Sex Role Inventory) may lack temporal validity, as societal views on gender have shifted significantly over time.

---

Gender Incongruence

Gender incongruence is a term used to describe a condition where an individual experiences discomfort or distress because there is a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender identity.

It was previously known as Gender Identity Disorder (GID) or transgenderism.

The updated terminology, “gender incongruence” or “gender dysphoria,” is considered a positive change as it is more affirmative and destigmatizing, framing gender diversity without necessarily suggesting abnormality or pathology.

• Biological sex is typically assigned at birth based on the appearance of genitals. It refers to the biological status of being male, female, or intersex, determined by genetic (XX or XY chromosomes) and anatomical differences from conception.
• Gender identity refers to a person’s psychological sense of self, their deeply felt, inherent sense of being a boy, a man, or male; a girl, a woman, or female; or a non-binary gender (such as gender-queer, gender-neutral, agender, or gender-fluid). This identity may or may not correspond to the sex assigned at birth.

For most people, biological sex and gender identity align, but for individuals experiencing gender incongruence, there is a clear mismatch.

This can cause distressing and uncomfortable feelings, known as gender dysphoria. It is important to note that gender dysphoria is a recognized medical condition, not a mental illness.

Some trans people have a strong and persistent desire to live according to their gender identity rather than their biological sex, and may seek treatment to align their physical appearance with their gender identity. Gender incongruence is also distinct from transvestism or sexual orientation.

Signs of Gender Incongruence

The first signs can emerge at a very young age.

For example, a child might refuse to wear clothes typically associated with their assigned gender or dislike participating in gender-stereotypical games.

While such behavior can be a normal part of growing up, for those with gender incongruence, it persists into adulthood.

Adults may feel “trapped” in a body that doesn’t match their gender identity, leading to unhappiness about conforming to societal expectations based on their anatomical sex.

They may also strongly desire to change or remove physical signs of their biological sex, such as facial hair or breasts.

Assessment and Treatment

A diagnosis of gender dysphoria typically involves an in-depth assessment by two or more specialists, often over several sessions spanning a few months. This assessment aims to determine:

• If there’s a clear mismatch between biological sex and gender identity.
• If there’s a strong desire to change physical characteristics due to this mismatch.
• How the individual is coping with any difficulties from the mismatch.
• The development of their feelings and behaviors over time.
• The support available from friends and family. A general physical and psychological health assessment may also be included.

Treatment plans are individualized and aim to reduce or eliminate the distressing feelings caused by the mismatch.

This can involve psychological support, dressing and living as the preferred gender, taking hormones, or undergoing surgery to change physical appearance.

The majority of trans people who undergo such permanent changes are satisfied with the results.

---

Explanations for Gender Incongruence

The exact cause of gender incongruence is unclear, as gender development is complex with many possible variations. Explanations are generally divided into biological and social/psychological factors.

Biological Influences

Biological explanations suggest the mismatch between sex and gender is due to biological factors such as genetics, brain structure, and hormones.

• Genetic Influences: Research suggests a genetic component. For instance, twin studies have looked at the heritability of gender identity. Van Beijsterveldt found that 70% of the variance in gender identity among over 8,000 monozygotic (genetically identical) and dizygotic (sharing half their genes) twin pairs was linked to genetics, suggesting gender identity is heritable. Hare et al. also investigated the androgen receptor gene as a possible genetic influence.
• Prenatal Hormones: Occasionally, hormones influencing biological sex development may not function properly on the brain, reproductive organs, or genitals. This could be due to additional hormones in the mother’s system (possibly from medication) or the foetus’s insensitivity to hormones like androgens, known as Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS).
  • Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS): This is a genetic condition affecting approximately 1 in 20,000 individuals, where the body is unable to respond to androgens (male sex hormones). Individuals with AIS have XY (male) chromosomes but their foetus does not fully or at all respond to testosterone. This impacts the development of typical male genitals, meaning a penis may not form or is underdeveloped, and external genitals may appear female. Internally, a person with AIS has no womb or ovaries, but has testes.
  • Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH): This inherited disorder, present at birth, affects the adrenal glands’ ability to produce certain hormones. Girls with CAH typically have normal internal reproductive organs but male external genitalia due to high levels of male hormones produced in the female foetus. In some cases, the baby might be mistaken for biologically male at birth.
• Brain Sex Theory: This theory suggests that gender incongruence may stem from the brain not matching the genetic sex. Observations indicate that certain brain areas, like the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BSTc) in the hypothalamus, may be closer in size and neuron density to the gender a trans individual identifies with, rather than their biological sex assigned at birth. Ramachandran (2008) even proposed gender dysphoria as an innate form of phantom limb syndrome, suggesting the brain’s image of sex organs is “hardwired” opposite to biological sex.

2. Social Influences (link to non–binary identity)

Social and psychological explanations propose that factors like family, peers, culture, and media contribute to atypical gender development.

• Distorted Parental Attitudes/Childhood Trauma: Stoller (1995) suggested that gender identity disorder could be rooted in social issues, particularly problematic relationships with parental figures. For example, boys with very close relationships with their mothers might develop female identification and gender identity. Childhood trauma is also mentioned as a potential social influence. Zucker (2002) found that children who met the full criteria for gender identity disorder were significantly more likely to also have separation anxiety disorder, suggesting a link to mother-son interactions.
• Social Learning Theory (SLT): SLT suggests that gendered behavior is learned through observation, imitation, and reinforcement. If a child is rewarded for cross-gender behavior, they are more likely to repeat it and potentially develop gender dysphoria. Children observing non-gender conforming role models being rewarded might also exhibit cross-gender behavior (vicarious reinforcement). SLT also suggests that having few same-sex role models can increase the likelihood of cross-gender behavior. However, SLT struggles to explain atypical gender development because social pressures typically punish non-gender conforming behavior, and gender-normative behavior is constantly rewarded. The fact that atypical gender development occurs despite these pressures may point to biological explanations.
• Cognitive Explanations (Dual Pathway Theory): This theory proposes that while children develop typical sex-typed schemas (attitudinal pathway), those who experience gender dysphoria also develop a second set of non-sex-typed schemas from personal experiences (personal pathway). If these personal schemas override the attitudinal pathway, the child may become androgynous or gender dysphoric.

Research and Evaluation [AO3]

• Support for Biological Explanations:
  • Heylens (2012) provides genetic evidence from twin studies.
  • Zhou (1995) and others found differences in brain structure, like the BSTc, aligning with identified gender rather than biological sex.
  • Theisen’s (2019) analysis of transgender individuals’ genetic sequences revealed 21 gene variations linked to pre-birth oestrogen reception, suggesting early hormonal influences on brain development.
  • Ramachandran’s (1995) work on phantom limb syndrome supports the idea of cross-wiring in the brain for gender dysphoria, with different rates of phantom penis sensations reported by non-GID and GID men who had undergone penectomy.
• Challenges/Limitations of Biological Explanations:
  • Hulshoff et al. (2000) found that hormone therapy can affect the size of the BSTc, suggesting observed brain differences might be a result of treatment rather than a cause of GID.
  • Some evidence shows minimal hormonal differences between people with and without gender dysphoria.
  • Twin studies face challenges in disentangling genetic and environmental influences.
  • Assuming gender dysphoria is purely biological implies it’s fixed and irreversible, but many children “grow out” of cross-gender identification. Drummond (2000) found that only 12% of young girls with childhood gender dysphoria still experienced it 10 years later, and Wallien (2008) found similar results (27% persistence) in a mixed group of boys and girls. These findings suggest gender identity in early childhood is not fixed and can be influenced by social-psychological factors, which can explain these shifts.
• Social Sensitivity of Research:
  • Research into gender incongruence is socially sensitive.
  • If biological causes are identified, it could increase understanding and reduce stigma, as it suggests the condition is not a “choice”.
  • However, such research could also lead to harm if misinterpreted, for example, by implying that transsexualism is inevitable or that individuals with biological “abnormalities” should be “cured” or stigmatized.

Interactionist Approach

It is increasingly suggested that gender incongruence likely results from a complex interaction of both biological and social/psychological factors.

Biological factors might predispose individuals, and their social experiences throughout life could then determine whether an atypical gender identity persists into adulthood.

---

Social sensitivity of research into gender incongruence

What is Social Sensitivity in Psychological Research?

Socially sensitive research refers to studies where there are potential social consequences for the participants involved, or for the wider group of people represented or related to the research.

This can include consequences related to public opinion, policy changes, or even discrimination against certain groups.

The term “ethical implications” specifically considers the broader impact or consequences psychological research findings can have beyond the immediate participants, on individuals, groups, or society.

Gender Incongruence and its Social Sensitivity

Gender incongruence, previously known as Gender Identity Disorder (GID) or transgenderism, describes a condition where an individual experiences discomfort or distress due to a mismatch between their biological sex assigned at birth and their gender identity.

Research into this area is inherently socially sensitive because it deals with a deeply personal aspect of identity that can have significant societal implications.

Here’s why it’s particularly sensitive:

1. Potential for Misinterpretation and Stigma: The findings of research into gender incongruence can be misinterpreted by wider society, potentially leading to stigma. If research is seen to suggest that atypical gender identity is a “choice” or something that should be “treated,” it can cause significant distress and prejudice for individuals experiencing gender incongruence.
2. Terminology and De-stigmatization: The shift in terminology from “Gender Identity Disorder” (GID) to “gender dysphoria” and more broadly “gender incongruence” is considered a positive step in reducing stigma. The older terms framed gender diversity as a “deviation from the norm” or a “mental health condition”. The updated language, “gender incongruence,” acknowledges the experience without necessarily implying abnormality or pathology, particularly when psychological distress is not present. This change by the scientific community (e.g., psychologists who helped create the DSM-5) is an attempt to be more socially sensitive towards the group being studied.
3. Biological vs. Social/Psychological Explanations: The debate over the causes of gender incongruence (biological vs. social/psychological factors) is highly sensitive.
   • Biological Causes: If biological causes (e.g., genetics, brain structure, prenatal hormones) are identified, it could potentially increase understanding and reduce stigma, as it suggests the condition is not a “choice”. However, it could also lead to harm if misinterpreted, for example, by implying that transsexualism is inevitable, or that individuals with biological “abnormalities” should be “cured” or stigmatized.
   • Social/Psychological Causes: Similarly, if social or psychological factors (e.g., distorted parental attitudes, childhood trauma, social learning) are emphasized, it might be misconstrued as blaming parents or implying the condition is preventable or a result of upbringing, which can also be stigmatizing.
4. Impact on Policy and Treatment: Research findings can influence public policy and treatment approaches. For instance, decisions about healthcare access, legal recognition of gender identity, or support services might be shaped by psychological research, highlighting the need for careful interpretation and application of findings.

How Psychologists Deal with Social Sensitivity in Research

Given the potential for harm, psychologists must approach socially sensitive research with great care. The British Psychological Society’s (BPS) code of ethics provides guidelines for ethical conduct in research, which are particularly crucial for socially sensitive topics.

Here are several ways researchers can deal with issues related to social sensitivity:

1. Reflexivity: Researchers should actively reflect on their own personal biases, beliefs, values, and influential position, as these can unconsciously affect the research process and interpretation of findings. This self-awareness helps to identify stereotypes that might influence the interpretation of participant behavior.
2. Careful Formulation of Research Questions: Researchers must carefully consider their research questions to avoid asking questions that could be damaging or misrepresent certain groups. The phrasing of questions should not reinforce stereotypes about the group being studied.
3. Anticipate Misuse and Value-Free Presentation: Researchers should be alert to the possibility of their findings being misused and take steps to present them in a clear, value-free way, without ideological assumptions. This involves communicating clearly what the research does not mean and highlighting its limitations to prevent misinterpretation and misapplication.
4. Manage Communication with the Media: Psychologists should take steps to avoid sensational media presentation of their findings. Misreported or sensationalized findings can have serious ethical implications, as seen in cases where research on autistic traits was misinterpreted to suggest prenatal screening for autism and selective termination.
5. Ethical Committees and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Research proposals, especially those on sensitive topics, should be submitted to ethics committees. These committees weigh the possible costs (e.g., distress to participants, potential harm to society) against the potential benefits (e.g., increased understanding, societal improvements) before deciding if a study should proceed. Only if the benefits are deemed to outweigh the costs should the research be conducted.
6. Participant Well-being and Confidentiality: Researchers must consider the possible reactions of participants to any research procedure and ensure their protection from harm, distress, and embarrassment. This includes ensuring anonymity and confidentiality of data, as personal information could affect participants’ lives if leaked. Debriefing procedures are crucial, especially if deception is used.
7. Explicit Limitations: Clearly stating the limitations of the research (e.g., sample characteristics, methodological constraints) helps prevent overgeneralization or misapplication of findings.