Unit 3

CHAPTER 3:
GENDER AND CULTURE IN PSYCHOLOGY

Name of Reporter: Alaika M. Poquiz

Course and Year: BSE Science II-2
Instructor: Mr. Erwin Tantay

OVERVIEW

Gender, the equality of the sexes, and societal inequalities more generally have been intensely
debated and studied by social scientists in the last several decades. In the wake of the debates, new fields of
study and new ways of thinking about old issues have emerged. This is as true of psychology as of other
social sciences. When psychologists take contemporary scholarship on gender, ethnic groups, sexuality, and
other social categorizations into account, foundational assumptions and practices in psychology begin to shift.

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

At the end of the lesson, the pre-service teachers shall be able to:
1. Understand the roots of the new psychological scholarship on gender and culture
2. Apply these theories to a range of contemporary issues that are relevant to both national context and
broader international context.
3. Create acronym for psychological scholarship

LEARNING CONTENTS

The Roots of the New Psychological Scholarship on Gender and Culture

Psychological scholarship about gender and culture constitutes a rich and varied field of knowledge that
has flowered over the last forty years. It began with psychological researchers and psychotherapists who were
active in the women’s liberation movement in the 1960s and 1970s. They established a field of knowledge,
then called the psychology of women, which challenged many taken-for-granted ideas in psychology. They
argued, for instance, that psychology was androcentric; that is, that the discipline and many of its practices
had been shaped by the interests and experiences of men, primarily white, middle-class men in western,
high-income parts of the world.

The new psychological scholarship on gender and culture is about creating a more inclusive and accurate
understanding of human behavior by incorporating gender equality and cultural context into psychological
research. It was a shift away from a male-dominated view of the world and toward a broader, more inclusive
approach that aims to address real social issues and improve the lives of marginalized groups.

The book "Gender and Culture in Psychology: Theories and Practices" by Eva Magnusson and Jeanne
Marecek challenges traditional psychological approaches to gender and culture in several key ways:

I. Moving Beyond Individual Differences

Emphasis on Context rather than internal factors.
The book emphasizes the interconnectedness of individuals and their social environments, arguing that
gender and culture shape human behavior and identity through social interactions, cultural norms, and power

1
dynamics. Unlike the traditional psychology which often focuses on individual differences, attributing behavior
to personality traits, cognitive styles, or biological predispositions. This approach often overlooks the influence
of social and cultural contexts

II. Reframing Gender as a Social Construct

Emphasis on Social Construction
Unlike the traditional approaches that often view gender as a fixed attribute based on biological sex, leading
to simplistic explanations of gender differences, the book emphasizes that gender is a social construct,
shaped by cultural norms, societal expectations, and power relations. This approach recognizes the fluidity
and dynamism of gender, acknowledging the diversity of gender identities and expressions.

III. Challenging the Universal Applicability of Psychological Theories

Emphasis on Cultural Specificity
Traditional psychology often seeks to identify universal principles of human behavior, assuming that these
principles apply across cultures and contexts. The book emphasizes the importance of considering cultural
context in understanding gender and behavior. It recognizes that psychological theories and findings may not
be universally applicable and that cultural factors can significantly shape human experience.
Example: Relativist Perspective/Relativism

IV. Advocating for Interpretative Research Methods

Emphasis on Qualitative Methods
The book advocates for interpretative research methods, such as qualitative interviews, focus groups, and
discourse analysis. These methods allow researchers to delve deeper into the meanings and experiences of
individuals within their social and cultural contexts. Traditional psychology often relies heavily on quantitative
research methods, such as experiments and surveys, to study behavior. These methods can be limited in their
ability to capture the nuances of human experience.

V. Integration of Feminist Perspective

Emphasis on Feminist Perspective in Psychology
The book draws heavily from feminist psychology, incorporating insights into the social construction of
gender, the impact of power dynamics, and the experiences of women. This integration provides a more
critical and nuanced understanding of gender and culture
For example, in psychology, researchers who studied women also had to contend with the discipline’s
disregard for “applied” research, which was viewed as less valuable than “pure” or “basic” research. In the
eyes of the discipline, research about women (in contrast to research about men) was not seen as “general”
research about humans, but as research about a special group (male college students, white, 18 and above
year of age), often with solely utilitarian value. This practice was heavily criticized by early feminist
psychologists as androcentric. That is, the research centered on men’s experiences and interests and took
them to represent all human experiences and interests. Such one-sexed studies of “general human
psychology” rarely used women as subjects (Crawford and Marecek, 1989). An analysis of psychology journal
articles showed that when researchers used all-female (versus all-male) samples, they were more likely to
provide a justification for a single-sex sample and to point out that their results could not be generalized to the
other sex (Ader and Johnson, 1994). Similarly, samples of people who were not white, and of people who
were not heterosexuals, were rarely taken to represent the population of humans in general (Guthrie, 2004;
Mays, 1988). When members of such groups were studied, the goal was to learn about issues that were seen
as specific to them, such as low academic achievement, unsafe sex, or teenage pregnancy.
Feminists in psychology took up research aimed at challenging discriminatory and oppressive cultural
views and fostering societal changes that would expand options for women and girls. The topics mirrored the
social issues being addressed by the feminist movement.

The Power of Situations toward a Cultural Psychology of Gender

2
 Many feminists in psychology have criticized psychologists for being preoccupied with possible intrinsic
differences between men and women, but disregarding the different circumstances in which men and women
live. First they investigated whether psychology’s claims and findings about men and women were universally
valid (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974). If the findings were not universal, then what accounted for them? Feminist
psychologists studied the effects of social expectations, situational demands, and social rewards and
penalties. They found ample evidence that these social conditions produced gendered behavior (Haaken,
1988; Sharps et al., 1994; Sherman, 1978). Moreover, many activities and behaviors elicited different
responses from others depending on whether they were performed by a woman or a man (Deaux and Major,
1987).

Researchers also studied how onlookers made different interpretations of behavior, physical attributes, and
skills depending on the sex category of the person whom the onlooker observed. Such social gendering
patterns were observed across the life span and across many different domains, including infant
temperament, behavior in corporate boardrooms, scholarly essay writing, and teenagers’ dating behavior. For
example, a number of studies showed that the physical characteristics, temperament, and activities of an
infant (sometimes referred to as Baby X) were judged and recalled differently depending on whether
onlookers believed Baby X was a boy or a girl (Seavey et al., 1975; Sidorowicz, 1980).

These lines of feminist research moved the explanatory locus from the inside of the individual to the
interpersonal surround. The researchers highlighted the power of local situational variations, social
expectations, and social rewards and penalties. Such forces, they showed, can influence people’s
behavior in such a way that women and men behave according to gendered expectations. The research also
showed that because of such expectations, a certain social situation may not be the “same” situation for a
woman and a man. Sometimes the “same” actions performed by a man or by a woman may be perceived as
different actions. Research within this “situational” framework has produced many important findings showing
the extent of situational demands and their power to create gendered patterns of behavior. This field of
research continues to flourish, accumulating more and more evidence of the thoroughgoing power of the
social environment. The research has lent itself to activist projects, such as programs to eliminate sex-role
stereotyping in school classrooms, activism against sexual harassment, and challenges to sexualized
portrayals of girls in popular culture (e.g., Lamb and Brown, 2006; Sadker et al., 1994).

Although the research on the power of situations has produced important knowledge, it does not provide
the complete picture. In much of the research, expectations and norms are presumed to be located in Toward
a cultural psychology of gender 33 cognitive schemas, attitudes, and beliefs. Little attention is paid to tracing
the origins of these expectations and norms to wider contexts. When psychologists stop at this point, their
theories risk “psychologizing” phenomena that are social and cultural in origin. They also risk framing people
as “cultural dopes,” that is, as automatons who cannot help but march to the tune of situational demands
(Garfinkel, 1967, p. 68). Situational approaches have also been criticized for accepting uncritically the
categories “man” and “woman” as they are conventionally conceived. In the eyes of the critics, the categories
themselves and their social and cultural origins need to be interrogated.

The approaches we describe below address these limitations. Above all, they take into account how the
meanings of sex categories are continually negotiated – for example, in close interactions, in institutional
frameworks, in state policies, and in mass media. These negotiations are of interest to psychologists because
they serve to regulate people’s conceptions of themselves and their actions, as well as interactions between
people. The approaches go beyond proximal situations to examine cultural and political systems of meaning
and power. Researchers assume that any phenomenon, no matter how local, is always formed and given
meaning within the larger social and cultural context. Researchers also assume that language – as the
primary medium of social interchange – plays a key role in giving meaning to phenomena and in social
negotiations about meanings. These approaches do not presuppose that “man” and “woman” are a priori
categories or natural kinds. Rather, they take the creation and upholding of the two-sex model as a subject of
investigation. They also take gender – that is, the meanings given to the sex categories – as a subject for

3
investigation. In this view, the sex categories and the meanings that they are given in a particular society are
not only about local situational demands. They are part of and dependent on larger cultural patterns (West
and Zimmerman, 1987, 2009).

LEARNING ACTIVITY
Instruction: Choose the best answer for each question.
1. What is the primary criticism feminist psychologists have leveled at traditional psychological research on
gender?
a) It focuses too much on individual differences rather than shared human experiences.
b) It overemphasizes biological factors and ignores the influence of social environment.
c) It relies too heavily on self-report data, which is unreliable.
d) It fails to adequately address the role of culture in shaping gender.
2. What key concept did feminist psychologists introduce to challenge traditional views on gender?
a) The "gender schema"
b) The "ethics of care"
c) The "social construction of gender"
d) The "gender identity spectrum"
3. What is the significance of the "Baby X" studies in feminist psychology?
a) They demonstrated that infants are born with innate gender differences.
b) They highlighted how social expectations influence perceptions of gender even from a very young
age.
c) They proved that gender roles are learned through observation and imitation.
d) They showed that gender stereotypes are universal across cultures.
4. What is a potential limitation of the "situational" approach to understanding gender?
a) It fails to acknowledge the role of individual agency in shaping behavior.
b) It doesn't adequately account for the influence of cultural and historical contexts.
c) It relies too heavily on quantitative research methods.
d) It doesn't consider the impact of biological factors on gender.
5. What is the main argument of the "cultural psychology of gender" approach?
a) Gender is a fixed and unchanging category based on biological sex.
b) Gender is a product of individual psychological processes.
c) Gender is shaped by social, cultural, and political forces.
d) Gender is primarily determined by individual choices and experiences.
6. Identify the term used to describe the criticism that traditional psychology has primarily focused on the
experiences and perspectives of men, neglecting those of women and other marginalized groups.
a) Ethnocentric
b) Androcentric
c) Sociocentric
d) Egocentric
7. Identify the main argument of the "cultural psychology of gender" approach.
a) Gender is a fixed and unchanging category based on biological sex.
b) Gender is a product of individual psychological processes.
c) Gender is shaped by social, cultural, and political forces.
d) Gender is primarily determined by individual choices and experiences.
8. Identify the main reason why feminist psychologists have criticized the traditional view of "applied" research
in psychology.
a) It is often used to study topics that are not relevant to real-world problems.
b) It is often conducted on samples that are not representative of the general population.
c) It is often seen as less valuable than "pure" or "basic" research, which has led to a neglect of
research on women and other marginalized groups.
d) It is often based on flawed research methodologies that produce unreliable results.

True or False:

4
9. Feminist psychology emphasizes that gender is a fixed attribute based on biological sex
10. Traditional psychology has often relied heavily on quantitative research methods, such as experiments
and surveys, which are considered to be the best way to capture the nuances of human experience.

SUMMARY
The new psychological scholarship on gender and culture is about creating a more inclusive and accurate
understanding of human behavior by incorporating gender equality and cultural context into psychological
research. It was a shift away from a male-dominated view of the world and toward a broader, more inclusive
approach that aims to address real social issues and improve the lives of marginalized groups. Moving
Beyond Individual Differences, Reframing Gender as a Social Construct, Challenging the Universal
Applicability of Psychological Theories, Emphasis on Cultural Specificity, Advocating for Interpretative
Research Methods, Integration of Feminist Perspective are the ways that challenges traditional psychological
approaches to gender and culture discussed in the book.
Power of local situational variations, social expectations, and social rewards and penalties affects the
gendered behavior

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the field of psychological scholarship on gender and culture has evolved significantly over
the past forty years, originating from the efforts of researchers and psychotherapists involved in the women's
liberation movement. This expansion led to the establishment of the psychology of women, challenging the
androcentric nature of traditional psychology that primarily catered to the experiences of white, middle-class
men. The new scholarship aims to create a more inclusive and accurate understanding of human behavior by
incorporating gender equality and cultural context into research, moving away from a male-dominated
perspective towards a broader, more encompassing approach that addresses real social issues and uplifts
marginalized groups.
The book "Gender and Culture in Psychology: Theories and Practices" by Eva Magnusson and Jeanne
Marecek presents a paradigm shift in psychological approaches by emphasizing context over internal factors,
reframing gender as a social construct, challenging the universal applicability of psychological theories by
focusing on cultural specificity, advocating for interpretative research methods, and integrating a feminist
perspective. This comprehensive approach not only highlights the interconnectedness of individuals with their
social environments but also recognizes the dynamic and fluid nature of gender identities shaped by societal
norms and power dynamics. By delving into the complexities of cultural contexts and power dynamics, these
approaches offer a nuanced understanding of gender and culture beyond traditional psychological
frameworks, paving the way for more critical and inclusive research in the field.

REFERENCES

Magnusson, E., & Marecek, J. (2012). Gender and Culture in Psychology Theories and Practices. New York, New York:
Cambridge University Press.