Blogger Liz Henry discusses Herring and Paolillo's (2006) findings that genre, not gender, will predict the "genderedness" of a blog writing sample, as analyzed by the Gender Genie (which uses an algorithm from Koppel and Argamon (2002). They found that "filter blogs" (that is, blogs that focus on a specific topic) tend to be analyzed as male, whereas "diary blogs" are analyzed as female, suggesting that (as Henry puts it) "genre itself is gendered."
However, Schler, Koppel, Argomon, and Pennebaker(2006) believes that gender differences do appear in blog-writing: "The stylistic and content differences we have found are each sufficient to permit reasonably accurate automated classification according to gender and age bracket." Schler et al claim that their algorithm has an 80% accuracy rate for gender or age identification for unknown samples. Interestingly, Schler et al found that writing in both genders grows more "male" with age.
For fun, I put the last 5 posts from this blog into the Gender Genie, but I split them into halves. I put the last 5 "evidence" segments into one analysis, and the last 5 "opinion" segments into another. I was surprised to find that both segments were guessed as male -- although the "opinion" parts had a more androgynous score (M/F = 1.26 vs 1.62). The last 5 posts on my personal livejournal were the most androgynous, with a male/female score of 1.16.
livejournal version
Friday, December 29, 2006
Thursday, December 28, 2006
Mad Money
Pat Veretto (in an About.com article on "Frugal Living") suggests that men perceive frugality as a threat, whereas women see it as security. Verreto's bias that women are more frugal than men is not only obvious, but directly stated. In contrast, a Neilsen/Netratings survey (2006) found that women were more likely to have overspent at Christmas. Dittmar (2005) reports that women are also more likely to be compulsive buyers.
Millan and Piskaldo (1999) (in Psychology Today) paint a vivid picture with the cheapskate-husband and the overspending-wife stereotype; however, they are quick to point out that a relationship may be organized just the opposite. "Partners tend to assume defense styles, or personalities, in relation to money that are direct opposites to each other. I call it Mellan's Law: If opposites don't attract right off the bat, then they will create each other eventually. Commonly, a hoarder marries a spender."
It's a disgusting but true paradox. Women make less money, and yet spend more of it. It certainly seems like most advertising targets women (which is probably why men are characterized as inept in TV commercials). However, I think spending is, for a lot of women, a form of hoarding and frugality. "Stocking up" seems to be a distinctly feminine characteristic, as is the concept of saving-by-spending. As Verreto rightly points out in her article, women "ensure that there is enough - money or whatever." The "whatever" is the core of the danger.
livejournal version
Millan and Piskaldo (1999) (in Psychology Today) paint a vivid picture with the cheapskate-husband and the overspending-wife stereotype; however, they are quick to point out that a relationship may be organized just the opposite. "Partners tend to assume defense styles, or personalities, in relation to money that are direct opposites to each other. I call it Mellan's Law: If opposites don't attract right off the bat, then they will create each other eventually. Commonly, a hoarder marries a spender."
It's a disgusting but true paradox. Women make less money, and yet spend more of it. It certainly seems like most advertising targets women (which is probably why men are characterized as inept in TV commercials). However, I think spending is, for a lot of women, a form of hoarding and frugality. "Stocking up" seems to be a distinctly feminine characteristic, as is the concept of saving-by-spending. As Verreto rightly points out in her article, women "ensure that there is enough - money or whatever." The "whatever" is the core of the danger.
livejournal version
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
"Alley Cats and Sex Kittens"
Continuing yesterday's theme, a story in The Age (Aus) reports that a parasite present in up to 40% of adults worldwide may have undiscovered effects on human behavior. Toxoplasma gondii may be responsible for changes in "sexual attractiveness, IQ, schizophrenia and the likelihood of being in a car accident." The article suggests that men infected with the parasite tend to be more involved in crime, unhappier, and less attractive, whereas infected women are friendlier, more promiscuous, and more attractive than non-infected women. Toxoplasmosis is usually contracted from cat feces, but rarely has symptoms in people with healthy immune systems. However, there are dangers of serious brain or eye defects in infants who get infected before birth, which is why women who are pregnant are cautioned not to change litter boxes.
Flegr and Hrdy (1994) correlated toxoplasmosis infection with a weakening of the superego in men. Later, Flegr et al (2000) found infected women scored higher on the superego measure. Both of Flegr's articles insist that it is the infection causing the personality shifts, and not that people with certain personality types are more likely to become infected. Lindova et al (2006) suggests that the gender effects may not necessarily be valid, but that the subjects may be masking undesired personality traits, meaning that socialization of gender affects which traits are expressed on the measures.
I always had cats growing up, and I'm both anti-social and promiscuous. Obviously this research is entirely valid. All women who have cats must be easy, and all men who have cats must be anti-social rule-breakers with untidy clothes. However, this research does put the lie to author Virginia Ironside's ill-considered statement: "cat people are not known for their looks." Maybe she was just talking about the men?
livejournal version
Difference Blog reaches 100!
Also, today was the 100th topic on the Difference Blog. If you've enjoyed reading, please let your friends know.
Flegr and Hrdy (1994) correlated toxoplasmosis infection with a weakening of the superego in men. Later, Flegr et al (2000) found infected women scored higher on the superego measure. Both of Flegr's articles insist that it is the infection causing the personality shifts, and not that people with certain personality types are more likely to become infected. Lindova et al (2006) suggests that the gender effects may not necessarily be valid, but that the subjects may be masking undesired personality traits, meaning that socialization of gender affects which traits are expressed on the measures.
I always had cats growing up, and I'm both anti-social and promiscuous. Obviously this research is entirely valid. All women who have cats must be easy, and all men who have cats must be anti-social rule-breakers with untidy clothes. However, this research does put the lie to author Virginia Ironside's ill-considered statement: "cat people are not known for their looks." Maybe she was just talking about the men?
livejournal version
Difference Blog reaches 100!
Also, today was the 100th topic on the Difference Blog. If you've enjoyed reading, please let your friends know.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Pets and People
People of all genders have very strong attachments to their pets, or "companion animals", as they are often referred to in scholarly work. This is more likely a disambiguation of terms from PET (positron emission tomography) than a statement of personhood for the animals in question. Beck and Myers (1996) review covers some of the evidence for improved health and quality of life for pet owners, although they do acknowledge the "bites and zoonotic diseases" (diseases that can be passed from animal to human) that often accompany pet ownership. No gender differences in the benefits of pet ownership were reported in Beck and Myer's review.
In terms of grieving for a pet, a gender bias appears in the literature. Margolies (1999) case study examines the "heightened and often anxious attachment" women have to pets as a function of maternal grieving. Turner (2001) also emphasizes the child surrogacy role of pets. Wrobel and Dye (2003) report significant gender differences on 6 of 12 aspects of grief (but without the full article, I hesitate to speculate further).
Today's post is later than usual because (as a clever reader might have surmised) I am worried about my pet. My cat of 12 years, Fish, stopped eating over the weekend, so I spent this morning at the veterinarian with him. However, while sitting in the waiting room, I began to think of the many gender stereotypes that go with pet ownership. There is the "crazy cat lady" stereotype, and the fact that many people call all dogs "he" and all cats "she" regardless of the animal's sex. I began today's literature review hoping to discover whether men really prefer dogs or women really prefer cats, but couldn't find any data either way. Myself, I am a confirmed "cat person." I was afraid of dogs for years, although that's starting to fade as I get to meet more and more well-trained dogs. A poorly trained dog is still no small source of anxiety for me.
livejournal version
In terms of grieving for a pet, a gender bias appears in the literature. Margolies (1999) case study examines the "heightened and often anxious attachment" women have to pets as a function of maternal grieving. Turner (2001) also emphasizes the child surrogacy role of pets. Wrobel and Dye (2003) report significant gender differences on 6 of 12 aspects of grief (but without the full article, I hesitate to speculate further).
Today's post is later than usual because (as a clever reader might have surmised) I am worried about my pet. My cat of 12 years, Fish, stopped eating over the weekend, so I spent this morning at the veterinarian with him. However, while sitting in the waiting room, I began to think of the many gender stereotypes that go with pet ownership. There is the "crazy cat lady" stereotype, and the fact that many people call all dogs "he" and all cats "she" regardless of the animal's sex. I began today's literature review hoping to discover whether men really prefer dogs or women really prefer cats, but couldn't find any data either way. Myself, I am a confirmed "cat person." I was afraid of dogs for years, although that's starting to fade as I get to meet more and more well-trained dogs. A poorly trained dog is still no small source of anxiety for me.
livejournal version
Friday, December 22, 2006
The Timing of Death: Holidays and Gender
Many studies have examined whether the timing of death is, to some extent, under executive control. Skala and Freedland (2004) provide a review of some of these. Not included in this review is Anson and Anson (1997), who examined mortality patterns in Muslim communities in relationship to holidays. They suggest that observed differences in mortality by gender (for example, more women dying in the month of Ramadan than in the month previous) may be related to "different roles in the preparation and celebration of the holy day rites".
The work of Davis P. Phillips is especially controversial. Phillips et al (2004) do not report sex differences in cardiac mortality around Christmas, although they do report that there is a spike in mortality around the Christmas/New Year's time frame. On the other hand, Phillips and King (1988) reported a decrease in mortality in Jewish males just before and during the holiday of Passover, but Lee and Smith (2000) find no such pattern. Phillips and Smith (1990) suggest that Asian-American women are able to postpone death at the time of the Harvest Moon Festival, but Smith (2004) makes a good argument that this research is flawed as well.
We sometimes wondered if my grandmother was holding on for "one more Christmas" or "one more birthday". She was diagnosed with liver cancer, and only given 6-18 months to live, but survived nearly 5 years. Every time there was a gifting holiday, all her children and grandchildren worked especially hard to impress her, assuming that it would be the last gift they'd ever give her. In moods of morbid humor, we'd quietly joke that she'd keep hanging on as long as we kept the loot coming.
There will be no post on Monday.
An additional note to the post on gender differences in present buying: Lacher et al (1995, pdf) notes that men tend to prefer buying gifts that are practical, while women prefer buying sentimental gifts.
livejournal version
The work of Davis P. Phillips is especially controversial. Phillips et al (2004) do not report sex differences in cardiac mortality around Christmas, although they do report that there is a spike in mortality around the Christmas/New Year's time frame. On the other hand, Phillips and King (1988) reported a decrease in mortality in Jewish males just before and during the holiday of Passover, but Lee and Smith (2000) find no such pattern. Phillips and Smith (1990) suggest that Asian-American women are able to postpone death at the time of the Harvest Moon Festival, but Smith (2004) makes a good argument that this research is flawed as well.
We sometimes wondered if my grandmother was holding on for "one more Christmas" or "one more birthday". She was diagnosed with liver cancer, and only given 6-18 months to live, but survived nearly 5 years. Every time there was a gifting holiday, all her children and grandchildren worked especially hard to impress her, assuming that it would be the last gift they'd ever give her. In moods of morbid humor, we'd quietly joke that she'd keep hanging on as long as we kept the loot coming.
There will be no post on Monday.
An additional note to the post on gender differences in present buying: Lacher et al (1995, pdf) notes that men tend to prefer buying gifts that are practical, while women prefer buying sentimental gifts.
livejournal version
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Child's Play
Julie Henry reports in the Telegraph (UK) that by age four, "when left to their own devices, boys play pirates and girls play house." The article focuses largely on a research published in European Early Childhood Education Research Journal (not indexed online, apparently), by Sue Rogers. The Telegraph article quotes the study as warning against attempting to alter children's play patterns: "Adult intervention to move children on from gender stereotypical play might be counterproductive and inhibit the development of play."
However, it is likely that socialization into gender roles occurs prior to age four, and the Telegraph, to its credit, acknowledges this. Idle et al (1993) found that while parents rated toys for acceptability along generally gendered guidelines, when presented with a variety, parents spent the least amount of time with "feminine" toys, and children responded with equal enthusiasm regardless of the toy presented. Hagan and Kuebli (2006) found that fathers monitors 3-4 year old daughters more closely than they did sons of the same age, whereas mothers monitored children of both sexes similarly. There was a relationship between perception of the child's risk-taking behavior and maternal monitoring.
I had both trucks and dolls when I was a kid. While I don't remember what influences I had that inspired my play, I'm often a little disturbed by the themes that came up in it. For example, I remember vividly the day when the dump truck driver stopped at the truck stop and the waitress, played by Barbie, decided to abandon her dull life and take off with him on a life of romantic adventure. The height difference (Barbie was 11 inches tall, whereas Tonka characters were only about 4 inches tall) was a source of frequent arguments, but it was Barbie's constant nagging that eventually split up my toys. I must have been 6 or 7 at the time.
livejournal version
However, it is likely that socialization into gender roles occurs prior to age four, and the Telegraph, to its credit, acknowledges this. Idle et al (1993) found that while parents rated toys for acceptability along generally gendered guidelines, when presented with a variety, parents spent the least amount of time with "feminine" toys, and children responded with equal enthusiasm regardless of the toy presented. Hagan and Kuebli (2006) found that fathers monitors 3-4 year old daughters more closely than they did sons of the same age, whereas mothers monitored children of both sexes similarly. There was a relationship between perception of the child's risk-taking behavior and maternal monitoring.
I had both trucks and dolls when I was a kid. While I don't remember what influences I had that inspired my play, I'm often a little disturbed by the themes that came up in it. For example, I remember vividly the day when the dump truck driver stopped at the truck stop and the waitress, played by Barbie, decided to abandon her dull life and take off with him on a life of romantic adventure. The height difference (Barbie was 11 inches tall, whereas Tonka characters were only about 4 inches tall) was a source of frequent arguments, but it was Barbie's constant nagging that eventually split up my toys. I must have been 6 or 7 at the time.
livejournal version
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
What women want? When?
Frederick et al (2005) found that images of men in men's magazines are more musclular than images of men in women's magazines. Frederick et al suggest that this is related to men overestimating the level of muscularity desired by women, parallel to the idea that women overestimate the level of thinness desired by men.
This is hardly groundbreaking. Fallon and Rozin (1985) found these patterns, as did Cohn and Adler (1992). In addition to finding that women overestimated desired thinness and that men overestimated desired muscularity, these studies also suggest that peers have as much (if not more) influence than potential mates. Markey and Markey (2006) found that the longer a woman had been in a relationship, the more likely she was to believe her partner wished she was thinner. However, it seems likely that this is more a factor of greater age, which was associated with greater BMI in Markey and Markey's sample.
"Only a true friend would be so brutally honest" -- Donkey, in Shrek. I'm competitive. I know and accept this about myself. But I really don't miss the competitive nastiness surrounding female body image. However, this may be one of the reasons that my male friends, at this point in my life, are overwhelmingly heterosexual. I don't miss the assumption of dieting in same-sex interactions, and I find it's pervasive in gay culture as well. As I discussed in November, most men diagnosed with eating disorders are gay or bisexual. Perhaps an examination of steroid use or unhealthy exercise habits would reveal more body-image problems in heterosexual males, but I'm not yet convinced.
livejournal version
This is hardly groundbreaking. Fallon and Rozin (1985) found these patterns, as did Cohn and Adler (1992). In addition to finding that women overestimated desired thinness and that men overestimated desired muscularity, these studies also suggest that peers have as much (if not more) influence than potential mates. Markey and Markey (2006) found that the longer a woman had been in a relationship, the more likely she was to believe her partner wished she was thinner. However, it seems likely that this is more a factor of greater age, which was associated with greater BMI in Markey and Markey's sample.
"Only a true friend would be so brutally honest" -- Donkey, in Shrek. I'm competitive. I know and accept this about myself. But I really don't miss the competitive nastiness surrounding female body image. However, this may be one of the reasons that my male friends, at this point in my life, are overwhelmingly heterosexual. I don't miss the assumption of dieting in same-sex interactions, and I find it's pervasive in gay culture as well. As I discussed in November, most men diagnosed with eating disorders are gay or bisexual. Perhaps an examination of steroid use or unhealthy exercise habits would reveal more body-image problems in heterosexual males, but I'm not yet convinced.
livejournal version
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Academic Cheating
Whitley et al (1999) hypothesized that women, socialized as keepers of morality, would show less favorable attitudes towards academic cheating and less cheating behavior than men. While their meta-analysis did find a moderate difference in attitudes towards cheating, the difference in behaviors was small. One possible mediating factor they found was that cheating was more common in male-dominated fields, such as the sciences. Whitley (2001) followed up on this analysis with a survey of affect (emotional response) in self-identified cheaters, thinking that the disconnect between attitudes and behavior would lead women to have more negative emotions about their cheating. Women did not report more negative affect, but did report less positive affect, which Whitley concluded was mediated by the attitudinal differences.
Mustaine and Tewksbury (2005) look at cheating in a larger behavioral context, and find that male students who cheat are likely to have more additional problematic behaviors than females who cheat. Symaco and Marcelo (2003) found that student gender had an effect on faculty suspicions of academic dishonesty, but faculty gender did not. Simon et al (2003) also found that faculty of both genders were similar in their suspicion of and reaction to student cheating, but that female faculty had less confidence in the administrative management of ethics.
I got caught at cheating in high school, once. I was letting two other girls copy my test in social studies. It occurs to me now that I had cheated at other points, but that was the only time I cheated on a test. I didn't really look at sharing my homework as cheating, and it never occurred to me until just now that it was. Homework was more a form of currency, while I felt very insecure about the morality of cheating on a test. In college, I didn't do either, because by that point I had other means of getting people to be nice to me (even if they were an A-cup).
livejournal version
Mustaine and Tewksbury (2005) look at cheating in a larger behavioral context, and find that male students who cheat are likely to have more additional problematic behaviors than females who cheat. Symaco and Marcelo (2003) found that student gender had an effect on faculty suspicions of academic dishonesty, but faculty gender did not. Simon et al (2003) also found that faculty of both genders were similar in their suspicion of and reaction to student cheating, but that female faculty had less confidence in the administrative management of ethics.
I got caught at cheating in high school, once. I was letting two other girls copy my test in social studies. It occurs to me now that I had cheated at other points, but that was the only time I cheated on a test. I didn't really look at sharing my homework as cheating, and it never occurred to me until just now that it was. Homework was more a form of currency, while I felt very insecure about the morality of cheating on a test. In college, I didn't do either, because by that point I had other means of getting people to be nice to me (even if they were an A-cup).
livejournal version
Monday, December 18, 2006
Menstruation and Absenteeism.
Ichino and Moretti (2006) suggest that a substantial portion of the wage gap between men and women can be tied to menstrual cycles. Ichino and Moretti conclude that 11.8% of the earnings gap can be explained by absenteeism on a 28-day cycle. Slap's 2003 review suggests that 75% of adolescent girls suffer from problems associated with menstruation as well, and that this is a leading cause of doctor's visits among this group. In contrast, Hardie (1997) found no differences in absenteeism or work performance between women pre- during-, or post-menstrually and men.
Whether menstruation can or should be optional has been under investigation for some time. Loudon et al (1977) reported "enthusiastic" tolerance of an oral contraceptive regimen that reduced the number of periods nearly 30 years ago. More recently, Kaunitz (2000) pointed out that in modern society, women menstruate up to 3 times as often as in "primitive societies." Archer et al. (2006) reported this month that continuous oral contraception has similar safety and efficacy rates to cyclic oral contraception, a result that Reuters reported as meaning that ending periods was safe for most women (although this interpretation may be too broad).
Patri Friedman drew my attention to Ichino and Moretti. I am interested to see how their research translates cross-culturally, since I can't speak to working conditions in Italy. Hardie's study, which focused on actual reported cyclic data, as opposed to Ichino and Moretti's 28-day assumption, feels more likely to be accurate to me, but I'm aware of a bias in my own thinking, since my menstrual symptoms were rarely severe. Hardie did find that "self-diagnosed" PMS did correlate with health and work problems, so these results obviously require closer scrutiny.
It's worth noting that in the last post about menstruation, it seemed that women were at their closest to male responses during their periods, which makes it seem odd that avoiding it would decrease the gender gap.
livejournal version
Whether menstruation can or should be optional has been under investigation for some time. Loudon et al (1977) reported "enthusiastic" tolerance of an oral contraceptive regimen that reduced the number of periods nearly 30 years ago. More recently, Kaunitz (2000) pointed out that in modern society, women menstruate up to 3 times as often as in "primitive societies." Archer et al. (2006) reported this month that continuous oral contraception has similar safety and efficacy rates to cyclic oral contraception, a result that Reuters reported as meaning that ending periods was safe for most women (although this interpretation may be too broad).
Patri Friedman drew my attention to Ichino and Moretti. I am interested to see how their research translates cross-culturally, since I can't speak to working conditions in Italy. Hardie's study, which focused on actual reported cyclic data, as opposed to Ichino and Moretti's 28-day assumption, feels more likely to be accurate to me, but I'm aware of a bias in my own thinking, since my menstrual symptoms were rarely severe. Hardie did find that "self-diagnosed" PMS did correlate with health and work problems, so these results obviously require closer scrutiny.
It's worth noting that in the last post about menstruation, it seemed that women were at their closest to male responses during their periods, which makes it seem odd that avoiding it would decrease the gender gap.
livejournal version
Friday, December 15, 2006
Eating patterns in same-sex groups
Harrison et al (2006) found that men and women had different responses in eating patterns after exposure to idealized body images. Women ate less after viewing the sample images from Vogue and Cosmopolitan, whereas men ate more after viewing images from Men's Health and Men's Fitness. The authors suggest that the presentation of the images while in same-sex groups may have had an effect; that is, the women ate less in front of other women, and the men ate more in front of other men. Harrison said "[men] may be moved to eat even when he is not hungry, just to reassure himself and other men that he is sufficiently masculine." However, the subjects were not tested in mixed-sex groups.
Data about observer-sex effect on eating patterns does not appear to be available at all. Herman et al's 2003 review shows that different types of studies find conflicting effects of eating in groups versus alone; social facilitation studies find eating increases in groups, whereas impression management studies show eating decreases in groups. The review does note that group eating increase effects seem to be consistently larger in men. Chalken and Pliner (1987) found that both women and men associated small meal size with femininity in women, but not in men, and Bock and Kanarek's (1997) study seems to confirm these results.
Taking body size differences into account when consuming anything has always been a problem for me. When I was twelve, and just starting to enjoy coffee, I tried to keep up, cup for cup, with an adult friend of mine who probably had 100 pounds on me. I ended up vomiting violently in the parking lot, and it wouldn't be the last time I ended up ill as a result of my competitive nature. On the other hand, I can also get competitive about not consuming things. For example, if my partner says he's not hungry, I will often start thinking in terms of "I bet I can go longer without food than he can." In my case, it's sheer competitiveness, and not the associations with the food causing the unhealthy behavior.
I am also reminded of an episode of "Family Guy" (video) where the guys belittle Joe for not finishing his steak, specifically calling him feminine. The people who have posted this video clip to the internet have entitled it "Joe can't handle his steak" (a line not appearing in the show), seemingly validating the opinion that there is something wrong with Joe (apart from his disproportionately violent reaction to mocking).
livejournal version
Data about observer-sex effect on eating patterns does not appear to be available at all. Herman et al's 2003 review shows that different types of studies find conflicting effects of eating in groups versus alone; social facilitation studies find eating increases in groups, whereas impression management studies show eating decreases in groups. The review does note that group eating increase effects seem to be consistently larger in men. Chalken and Pliner (1987) found that both women and men associated small meal size with femininity in women, but not in men, and Bock and Kanarek's (1997) study seems to confirm these results.
Taking body size differences into account when consuming anything has always been a problem for me. When I was twelve, and just starting to enjoy coffee, I tried to keep up, cup for cup, with an adult friend of mine who probably had 100 pounds on me. I ended up vomiting violently in the parking lot, and it wouldn't be the last time I ended up ill as a result of my competitive nature. On the other hand, I can also get competitive about not consuming things. For example, if my partner says he's not hungry, I will often start thinking in terms of "I bet I can go longer without food than he can." In my case, it's sheer competitiveness, and not the associations with the food causing the unhealthy behavior.
I am also reminded of an episode of "Family Guy" (video) where the guys belittle Joe for not finishing his steak, specifically calling him feminine. The people who have posted this video clip to the internet have entitled it "Joe can't handle his steak" (a line not appearing in the show), seemingly validating the opinion that there is something wrong with Joe (apart from his disproportionately violent reaction to mocking).
livejournal version
Thursday, December 14, 2006
A question well stated.
According to a University of Surrey press release (2006), research by Hegarty and Buechel (due to be published in the Review of General Psychology) demonstrates a distinct bias in how questions about gender are framed in psychological research. When presenting differences between men and women, men tend to be presented as "the norm" and women's data is presented in terms of difference from men. The exception to this rule is in studies of parenting, where the mother is the stereotypical model. Hegarty, whose prior research includes similar questions about race and sexual orientation "norms", says "[psychologists] serve the public better when we think deeply about the ways that we implicitly frame questions."
The way questions are framed can make a huge difference in experimental data as well. Rudman et al (2001) found very unexpected results in a study of gender stereotypes because of connotations associated with gendered words. Men tended to identify themselves with potency and women identified themselves with warmth when the opposing concepts were negative. When the value of the matched words was changed, sex differences in responses were dramatically reduced.
One of my favorite rhetorical hobbyhorses lately is that "stating the question correctly is the only interesting part of problem solving." Okay, so it's not much of a hobbyhorse so much as a carousel, and not so much rhetoric as dogma. One of my biggest issues with psychological research is that the experiments are so easily contaminated by the form of the questions. This is certainly true in other fields as well, but in psychology it's fairly blatant, and it bothers me. Is it worth avoiding the bias examined by Hegarty and Buechel? What is the best method? My initial reaction is to compare both men and women's responses to the total population, but I'm not sure if that's statistically feasible.
livejournal version
The way questions are framed can make a huge difference in experimental data as well. Rudman et al (2001) found very unexpected results in a study of gender stereotypes because of connotations associated with gendered words. Men tended to identify themselves with potency and women identified themselves with warmth when the opposing concepts were negative. When the value of the matched words was changed, sex differences in responses were dramatically reduced.
One of my favorite rhetorical hobbyhorses lately is that "stating the question correctly is the only interesting part of problem solving." Okay, so it's not much of a hobbyhorse so much as a carousel, and not so much rhetoric as dogma. One of my biggest issues with psychological research is that the experiments are so easily contaminated by the form of the questions. This is certainly true in other fields as well, but in psychology it's fairly blatant, and it bothers me. Is it worth avoiding the bias examined by Hegarty and Buechel? What is the best method? My initial reaction is to compare both men and women's responses to the total population, but I'm not sure if that's statistically feasible.
livejournal version
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Present Tense
The Today Show's Jean Chatzsky reported yesterday on differences in men's and women's holiday shopping habits, based on BizRate Research's 2006 report. Men apparently feel more pressure to get the "right" gift than women, which Chatzsky suggests is a result of putting off shopping until the last minute. This is consistent with findings by Fischer and Arnold (1990) that men typically put off shopping until later than women, although their study found that men felt less pressure to find "the right gift" and were instead likely to spend more money per recipient. Fischer and Arnold also suggest that men shop for fewer gift recipients than women, and that the process of gift-buying is stereotyped as "women's work."
Genevieve Vaughn, author of For-Giving: A Feminist Criticism of Exchange frames the entire concept of gift-giving as a maternal enterprise, drawing a distinction between "giving in order to receive" (ego-oriented) and "giving in order to satisfy another's need" (other-oriented). However, while Vaughn pays a great deal of attention to the "delightful" nature of gift-giving, she does not seem to explore how this delight may be ego-oriented.
[edit 22DEC2006: Lacher et al (1995, pdf) notes that men tend to prefer buying gifts that are practical, while women prefer buying sentimental gifts.]
I think Chatzsky's wrong. While timing may play a part in men's holiday stresses, I think gender interactions play a bigger role. Men feel more pressure to get "the right gift" -- and spend more to find something impressive -- because women will punish the men in their lives for inappropriate gifting for months. I have never (that I recall) seen a man over the age of 13 express disappointment with a gift, but women in my family tell stories about "wrong gifts" for decades. I have noticed that I feel little or no remorse about expressing disappointment with a gift to my significant other, but will expend massive effort attempting not to reveal disappointment in gifts from other people. I've even attempted to do away with gifting in relationships on a couple of occasions because I start fights about the inappropriateness of presents, but I always find the disappointment of not doing gifts overrules my better judgement. This particular bit of socialization bothers the hell out of me.
livejournal version
Genevieve Vaughn, author of For-Giving: A Feminist Criticism of Exchange frames the entire concept of gift-giving as a maternal enterprise, drawing a distinction between "giving in order to receive" (ego-oriented) and "giving in order to satisfy another's need" (other-oriented). However, while Vaughn pays a great deal of attention to the "delightful" nature of gift-giving, she does not seem to explore how this delight may be ego-oriented.
[edit 22DEC2006: Lacher et al (1995, pdf) notes that men tend to prefer buying gifts that are practical, while women prefer buying sentimental gifts.]
I think Chatzsky's wrong. While timing may play a part in men's holiday stresses, I think gender interactions play a bigger role. Men feel more pressure to get "the right gift" -- and spend more to find something impressive -- because women will punish the men in their lives for inappropriate gifting for months. I have never (that I recall) seen a man over the age of 13 express disappointment with a gift, but women in my family tell stories about "wrong gifts" for decades. I have noticed that I feel little or no remorse about expressing disappointment with a gift to my significant other, but will expend massive effort attempting not to reveal disappointment in gifts from other people. I've even attempted to do away with gifting in relationships on a couple of occasions because I start fights about the inappropriateness of presents, but I always find the disappointment of not doing gifts overrules my better judgement. This particular bit of socialization bothers the hell out of me.
livejournal version
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
The Endocrinology of Social Success
Susman et al (1985) found that high-for-age sex hormone levels were linked to poor psychosocial outcomes for both adolescent girls and boys. Most studies of hormone effects on social interactions focus on this age group. Kershbaum et al (2006) compared saliva-measured testosterone levels in a group of 42 adolescents, and asked them to fill out evaluations of themselves and each other. Boys with high testosterone levels were considered to be leaders, but not likable, by their peers. Girls with higher testosterone were considered likable, but not leaders.
In adults, the results seem to be similar. Testosterone levels have often been linked to social status and success, but a review by Zitzmann and Nieschlag (2001) cautions against any broad interpretation of these results. In contrast, Cashdan (2003) found that high-estradiol women reported fewer competitive interactions over sports than women with lower levels, but most other competitive interaction measures were tied to androgens. While Cashdan does express different modes of aggression and competitiveness observed in her study (e.g. verbal aggression, overt competitiveness), she does not express whether any group was more or less socially successful as a result.
I'd like to start by recommending the Zitzmann and Nieschlag review to anyone who is interested in the research on testosterone effects. It's very broad and cautious, but it covers a lot of interesting research, and I found it fascinating. Now, on to the anecdotal drivel! I was (like my mother and father) a late bloomer. I didn't reach menarche until I was 15.5 (putting me solidly in the upper 10% of that particular curve), and was still just developing secondary sexual characteristics in college. I felt like this really made my social development difficult in a number of ways, although being a smug little brat probably didn't help, either.
In adults, the results seem to be similar. Testosterone levels have often been linked to social status and success, but a review by Zitzmann and Nieschlag (2001) cautions against any broad interpretation of these results. In contrast, Cashdan (2003) found that high-estradiol women reported fewer competitive interactions over sports than women with lower levels, but most other competitive interaction measures were tied to androgens. While Cashdan does express different modes of aggression and competitiveness observed in her study (e.g. verbal aggression, overt competitiveness), she does not express whether any group was more or less socially successful as a result.
I'd like to start by recommending the Zitzmann and Nieschlag review to anyone who is interested in the research on testosterone effects. It's very broad and cautious, but it covers a lot of interesting research, and I found it fascinating. Now, on to the anecdotal drivel! I was (like my mother and father) a late bloomer. I didn't reach menarche until I was 15.5 (putting me solidly in the upper 10% of that particular curve), and was still just developing secondary sexual characteristics in college. I felt like this really made my social development difficult in a number of ways, although being a smug little brat probably didn't help, either.
Monday, December 11, 2006
A running gag in the popular press
Last week's post on gender differences in sense of humor was apparently released at almost the same moment as Vanity Fair posted an an article by Christopher Hitchens, "the New Right's favorite Ex-Marxist"(Hitchens Watch), on the same subject. Hitchen's article seems to hinge on Azim et al (2005), which focuses on brain activation while reading comics.
Hitchen's claim that "women aren't funny" is a bit more extreme, even for a headline, than the UK Independent's (2006) hook last January that asserted "men don't fancy funny women." The Independent's article is based on Bressler et al (2005), which examined how men and women define the term "sense of humor" in a prospective mate.
Eileen Boylen, writing for The Boston Globe (2006), suggests that being funny may hamper women in business as well, although her column is strictly anecdotal. An article Boylen might have found interesting is Diane Martin's 2004 investigation of how women in management use humor as a conversational tool.
Okay, I'm asking for it, but here goes: in my experience, women who complain that they're not allowed to be funny generally aren't. There's a reason their humor falls flat, and it's not because of their sex. Actually, it's more complicated than that (no surprise). One of the biggest problems I had in adjusting to the gender role of a man was in the jokes I told. It's very different when a woman makes a sexist remark than when a man does, for example. However, the delicate balancing I'd had to do in insulting humor went out the window. As a woman, I'd had to be careful not to insult my male friends too much, because it seemed to escalate too quickly. In college, one of the most frequent complaints I got from boyfriends was that I too often insulted them in front of their friends. Coming from a man, my tempered insults became too weak, and I had to teach myself a whole new set of interactions. Sadly, it's impossible to tell in retrospect whether this was a gender-related bias, or whether I really wasn't funny, but looking back at my college diaries, I suspect the latter.
livejournal version
Hitchen's claim that "women aren't funny" is a bit more extreme, even for a headline, than the UK Independent's (2006) hook last January that asserted "men don't fancy funny women." The Independent's article is based on Bressler et al (2005), which examined how men and women define the term "sense of humor" in a prospective mate.
Eileen Boylen, writing for The Boston Globe (2006), suggests that being funny may hamper women in business as well, although her column is strictly anecdotal. An article Boylen might have found interesting is Diane Martin's 2004 investigation of how women in management use humor as a conversational tool.
Okay, I'm asking for it, but here goes: in my experience, women who complain that they're not allowed to be funny generally aren't. There's a reason their humor falls flat, and it's not because of their sex. Actually, it's more complicated than that (no surprise). One of the biggest problems I had in adjusting to the gender role of a man was in the jokes I told. It's very different when a woman makes a sexist remark than when a man does, for example. However, the delicate balancing I'd had to do in insulting humor went out the window. As a woman, I'd had to be careful not to insult my male friends too much, because it seemed to escalate too quickly. In college, one of the most frequent complaints I got from boyfriends was that I too often insulted them in front of their friends. Coming from a man, my tempered insults became too weak, and I had to teach myself a whole new set of interactions. Sadly, it's impossible to tell in retrospect whether this was a gender-related bias, or whether I really wasn't funny, but looking back at my college diaries, I suspect the latter.
livejournal version
Friday, December 8, 2006
Does Size Matter, revisited
Do differences in brain size actually matter? Do they matter in terms of relative size, or in terms of absolute size? What areas would these differences affect? Willerman et al (1991) investigated differences in total brain volume, relative to height; they found IQ correlated. Wickett et al (2000) also believe brain size may be correlated with intelligence, but they suspect different factors may correlate differently. In Wickett et al's study, they found that spatial imaging intelligence tests seemed to be negatively correlated with brain size, as opposed to memory-based tests, which correlated positively.
As always, I'd like to point out that a trend or an average is not a person. It is hard for me, as I'm sure as it's hard for many of you, to read sentences like "people with smaller brains (like women) don't do as well on intelligence tests." Is the information gained from these studies worth finding out? Is the question "irresponsible", as suggested last time we visited this question? I don't have a good answer. I do believe that science is a series of increasingly valid approximations, and that a single outlier doesn't disprove a model, but in studying humans, it gets ethically messy.
livejournal version
As always, I'd like to point out that a trend or an average is not a person. It is hard for me, as I'm sure as it's hard for many of you, to read sentences like "people with smaller brains (like women) don't do as well on intelligence tests." Is the information gained from these studies worth finding out? Is the question "irresponsible", as
livejournal version
Thursday, December 7, 2006
Home ownership
Yomokowski and Keister (2006) found that among households headed by a single adult, single mothers had the worst chance of accumulating wealth (compared to single fathers, and non-parents of both genders). Sedo and Kossoudji (2004) found that, within family type (married or single), women were as likely as men to own a home. In contrast Schmidt and Sevak (2006) found significant gaps even within family type between genders. However, these gaps disappeared when examining only younger households.
I'm moving into my first condo today. It was one of my personal goals to "not be renting when I'm 30" -- I don't turn 31 until June, so I'm taking this as a success. I'm trying to apply patterns to the people I know who own homes, but there are so few data points, I can't really make any observations. I know straight couples, single men, and single women who have purchased properties. I feel like the women were usually more willing to trade location for price and space than men (as in, willing to live in worse neighborhoods, or further out of town). I'm also having a hard time thinking of any queer couples I know who own their homes, but honestly, in this city (Boston/Cambridge), home ownership seems to be more exception than rule.
livejournal version
I'm moving into my first condo today. It was one of my personal goals to "not be renting when I'm 30" -- I don't turn 31 until June, so I'm taking this as a success. I'm trying to apply patterns to the people I know who own homes, but there are so few data points, I can't really make any observations. I know straight couples, single men, and single women who have purchased properties. I feel like the women were usually more willing to trade location for price and space than men (as in, willing to live in worse neighborhoods, or further out of town). I'm also having a hard time thinking of any queer couples I know who own their homes, but honestly, in this city (Boston/Cambridge), home ownership seems to be more exception than rule.
livejournal version
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Men and housework
Stereotypes about men and housework are widespread. Scharrer et al (2006) analyzed a week's worth of primetime commercials, and found that men doing housework were typically inept. De Ruijter et al. (2005) found that single men and women spent the same amounts on paying for "male" and "female" chores, except for dining expenses, where men paid more.
Knowles (2005) suggests that married men are doing more housework than they have in the past. South and Spitze (1994) found that widowed or divorced men do more housework than married or never-married men. South and Spitze also note that "an adult son living at home increases women's housework, whereas an adult daughter at home reduces housework for women and men." Sanchez (1994) notes that married couples value men's and women's contributions differently; male hours worked affects both male and female perceptions of "fairness" of labor division, but female hours worked affect only the female perception of fairness.
Robin Hanson's response to my question last week made me realize that I'd never investigated whether men's homes were really sloppier than women's homes. A careful reader will notice that I still haven't really presented any proof either way. It's surprisingly difficult to find any data on actual male and female home hygiene; the stereotypes are studied, but actual homes seem too difficult to assess.
My own housework habits range from pathetic (when I'm trying) to appalling (when I'm not). I was interested by the assertion in de Ruijter's paper that laundry was women's work. Laundry maintenance has usually struck me as a very gender neutral activity, and the division of laundry duties in mixed-sex households has been fairly even when I've noticed it.
livejournal version
Knowles (2005) suggests that married men are doing more housework than they have in the past. South and Spitze (1994) found that widowed or divorced men do more housework than married or never-married men. South and Spitze also note that "an adult son living at home increases women's housework, whereas an adult daughter at home reduces housework for women and men." Sanchez (1994) notes that married couples value men's and women's contributions differently; male hours worked affects both male and female perceptions of "fairness" of labor division, but female hours worked affect only the female perception of fairness.
Robin Hanson's response to my question last week made me realize that I'd never investigated whether men's homes were really sloppier than women's homes. A careful reader will notice that I still haven't really presented any proof either way. It's surprisingly difficult to find any data on actual male and female home hygiene; the stereotypes are studied, but actual homes seem too difficult to assess.
My own housework habits range from pathetic (when I'm trying) to appalling (when I'm not). I was interested by the assertion in de Ruijter's paper that laundry was women's work. Laundry maintenance has usually struck me as a very gender neutral activity, and the division of laundry duties in mixed-sex households has been fairly even when I've noticed it.
livejournal version
Tuesday, December 5, 2006
Rote vs. Rule-based language
Hartshorne and Ullman (2006), testing hypotheses about how males and females learned language, expected to find that girls "regularized" irregular verbs (like "holded" instead of "held") less often than boys. They found just the opposite; girls used "holded" more often than boys. Ullman's theory about declarative vs. procedural language learning (see his 2001 review for detail and competing views) does not seem to be confirmed by the 2006 experiment, but the words that girls tended to "regularize" were words with rhyming regular verbs (as in "holded" rhymes with "folded"). This was not true for the boys in the experiment.
Hulle et al (2004) tested vocabulary and two-word pairs in pairs of twin toddlers to determine how much of their language use was environment, genetic, or gender-based. While the greatest effect was shared environment, heritability seemed to be a bigger factor for boys than girls in vocabulary -- and higher for girls than boys in two-word combinations.
Interestingly, Catalan's (2003) study of Spanish-speaking adults learning a second language found that women tended to use rule-based strategies more often, while males tended to use vocabulary lists.
Ullman's 2006 study used a sample of 25 children, with ages between 3 and 5 years old (the boys were slightly older, but not in a statistically significant way). One factor that I didn't see addressed was the subject of cuteness. In my experience, children are well aware of the effect that "cute" errors can have on adults, girls are more prone to purposeful errors than boys, and breaking them of "cute" habits is really hard. Of course, I'm having a really hard time remembering the developmental difference between 2 and 5, which is huge. It could be that these studies are correct in their assumption that the children don't know any better, and that "cute incompetence" doesn't emerge until later. A lot of my experience with improper word use comes from adults; I've broughten my own baggage to this subject.
livejournal version
Hulle et al (2004) tested vocabulary and two-word pairs in pairs of twin toddlers to determine how much of their language use was environment, genetic, or gender-based. While the greatest effect was shared environment, heritability seemed to be a bigger factor for boys than girls in vocabulary -- and higher for girls than boys in two-word combinations.
Interestingly, Catalan's (2003) study of Spanish-speaking adults learning a second language found that women tended to use rule-based strategies more often, while males tended to use vocabulary lists.
Ullman's 2006 study used a sample of 25 children, with ages between 3 and 5 years old (the boys were slightly older, but not in a statistically significant way). One factor that I didn't see addressed was the subject of cuteness. In my experience, children are well aware of the effect that "cute" errors can have on adults, girls are more prone to purposeful errors than boys, and breaking them of "cute" habits is really hard. Of course, I'm having a really hard time remembering the developmental difference between 2 and 5, which is huge. It could be that these studies are correct in their assumption that the children don't know any better, and that "cute incompetence" doesn't emerge until later. A lot of my experience with improper word use comes from adults; I've broughten my own baggage to this subject.
livejournal version
Monday, December 4, 2006
Sense of humor not required
Azim et al (2005) examined differences in brain activity during humor appreciation using fMRI. Azim et al suggest that greater mesolimbic activation may indicate "greater reward network response and possibly less reward expectation" from humor in females. Shammi and Stuss (2003) focus on cognitive aging processes, and note that humor appreciation is correlated with many other cognitive abilities.
The evolutionary role of "sense of humor" has been a subject of some debate. Miller (2001) suggests that humor may be a way of advertising the survival traits of intelligence and creativity, whereas Storey (2003) counters that a sense of humor is related most strongly to group bonding and social adaptability. Bressler and Balshine (2005) found that while both women and men rated funny people as less trustworthy, women tended to select funny men over serious ones.
Sometimes I despair of my ability to effectively comment on gender at all. I never noticed differences in humor between men and women. Female friends have complained to me about how men find funny women threatening, and the research seems to back this up. (I never thought the ones complaining were very funny, though.) In the movie Shallow Hal, Gwyneth Paltrow's (comically undesirable, in the context of the film) character describes herself as the girl "who's not afraid to be funny." I feel like men's desire for intelligence in a mate is a separate issue, but if Miller is correct, separating the subjects may do more harm than good.
livejournal version
The evolutionary role of "sense of humor" has been a subject of some debate. Miller (2001) suggests that humor may be a way of advertising the survival traits of intelligence and creativity, whereas Storey (2003) counters that a sense of humor is related most strongly to group bonding and social adaptability. Bressler and Balshine (2005) found that while both women and men rated funny people as less trustworthy, women tended to select funny men over serious ones.
Sometimes I despair of my ability to effectively comment on gender at all. I never noticed differences in humor between men and women. Female friends have complained to me about how men find funny women threatening, and the research seems to back this up. (I never thought the ones complaining were very funny, though.) In the movie Shallow Hal, Gwyneth Paltrow's (comically undesirable, in the context of the film) character describes herself as the girl "who's not afraid to be funny." I feel like men's desire for intelligence in a mate is a separate issue, but if Miller is correct, separating the subjects may do more harm than good.
livejournal version
Friday, December 1, 2006
Valid complaints
Robin Hanson in Overcoming Bias discusses gender differences in complaining: "the politically correct theory, that women have worse lives, seems both wrong and biased." Kowalski's 1996 review of complaining suggests that Hanson is correct in observing that women complain more. However, it is suggested both speaker's and listener's impression of a statement as a "complaint" may vary according to gender. Kowalski (2002) also examines the positive aspects of complaining. Hanson's assertion that "women complain more [than men]" may have some truth to it.
Most of the study of complaining has involved married couples -- opposite-sex interaction. (Hanson's observations seem to focus more on same-sex interaction.) Fishman (1978) suggested that "women do more conversational work" than men. Stets and Burke (1996) also analyzed tapes of married couples, and found that the women used more negative strategies than the men. Flora and Segrin (2000) found that in married couples, complaining from wives had a greater negative effect on couple satisfaction than complaining from husbands. In fact, the correlations found by Flora and Segrin suggested that the lower wife-talk was, the higher satisfaction was.
Before I started writing this blog, I probably would have agreed with Robin Hanson that women didn't have worse lives than men. Not only was I exceptionally lucky when I was living as a woman, but I tend to assume that any hardship is easier on me than it would be on someone else -- a particularly insidious piece of egotism. However, after the reading I've done for the eighty (wow!) posts I've written here, I have to conclude that: actually, women do have it harder. Women have more medical problems and receive worse care, they receive less pay for the same work, they do the bulk of both child-rearing and housework, and have less free time than men, which they receive less satisfaction from. So I ask: exactly where do men have it worse?
livejournal version
Most of the study of complaining has involved married couples -- opposite-sex interaction. (Hanson's observations seem to focus more on same-sex interaction.) Fishman (1978) suggested that "women do more conversational work" than men. Stets and Burke (1996) also analyzed tapes of married couples, and found that the women used more negative strategies than the men. Flora and Segrin (2000) found that in married couples, complaining from wives had a greater negative effect on couple satisfaction than complaining from husbands. In fact, the correlations found by Flora and Segrin suggested that the lower wife-talk was, the higher satisfaction was.
Before I started writing this blog, I probably would have agreed with Robin Hanson that women didn't have worse lives than men. Not only was I exceptionally lucky when I was living as a woman, but I tend to assume that any hardship is easier on me than it would be on someone else -- a particularly insidious piece of egotism. However, after the reading I've done for the eighty (wow!) posts I've written here, I have to conclude that: actually, women do have it harder. Women have more medical problems and receive worse care, they receive less pay for the same work, they do the bulk of both child-rearing and housework, and have less free time than men, which they receive less satisfaction from. So I ask: exactly where do men have it worse?
livejournal version
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
