reading 2_gender identity and adjustment in middle childhood

7/25/2019 Reading 2_Gender Identity and Adjustment in Middle Childhood

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/reading-2gender-identity-and-adjustment-in-middle-childhood 1/15

Sex Roles, Vol. 49, Nos. 3/4, August 2003 ( °C

Gender Identity and Adjustment in Middle Childhood

Priscilla R. Carver,1, 2 Jennifer L. Yuner,1 and !avid G. Perry1, 3

This article has two purposes. The first is to present a brief (and speculative) account of the

developmental origins of the several components of gender identity featured in the multidi

mensional model of gender identity proposed by !gan and "erry (2##1). The second is to offer

additional empirical support for the construct and discriminant validity of the various gender

identity dimensions. Children ( M age = 11.$ years) were assessed for % components of

gender

identity& (a) felt gender typicality, (b) contentment with gender assignment, (c) felt pressure

for gender conformity, and (d) intergroup bias (the sentiment that one's own se is superior).

ender typicality, gender contentedness, and felt pressure (but not intergroup bias) related

to indees of psychosocial ad*ustment in specific and theoretically meaningful ways. The case

for a multidimensional approach to gender identity is strengthened.

"#Y $%R!&' gender identity+ gender typing+ gender roles.

ender identity is a central construct in many

accounts of psychosocial development (e.g., arris,

1--$+ accoby, 1--/), yet it has been defined in di

verse ways. 0ohlberg (1-) and ucer et al. (1--3)

viewed gender identity as nowing that one is a mem

ber of one se rather than the other+ 0agan (1-%)regarded gender identity as the degree to which one

perceives the self as conforming to cultural stereo

types for one's gender+ 4em (1-/1) saw gender iden

tity as the degree to which one internali5es societal

pressures for gender conformity+ reen (1-6%) and

7pence (1-/$) viewed gender identity as a fundamen

tal sense of acceptance of, and of belonging to, one's

gender .

8t is conceivable that all of the foregoing (and

still other) conceptuali5ations of gender identity have

merit but that different varieties or facets of gender

identity serve different psychological functions or af

fect ad*ustment in different ways. Thus, it may befruit ful to regard gender identity as a

multidimensional

1 9epartment of "sychology, :lorida ;tlantic <niversity,

4oca

=aton, :lorida.2 "resent address& 9epartment of "sychology, The

"ennsylvania

7tate <niversity, "ennsylvania.3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at 9epartment

of "sychology, :lorida ;tlantic <niversity, 4oca =aton, :lorida

33%31+ email& perrydg>fau.edu.

construct and to define gender identity as the col

lection of thoughts and feelings one has about one's

gender category and one's membership in it. ; re

cent study by !gan and "erry (2##1) was built on this

premise. !gan and "erry proposed that gender iden

tity is composed of five ma*or components& (a) mem bership nowledge (nowledge of membership in a

gender category)+ (b) gender typicality (the degree to

which one feels one is a typical member of one's gen

der category)+ (c) gender contentedness (the degree

to which one is happy with one's gender assignment)+

(d) felt pressure for gender conformity (the degree

to which one feels pressure from parents, peers, and

self for conformity to gender stereotypes)+ and (e) in

tergroup bias (the etent to which one believes one's

own se is superior to the other).

!gan and "erry (2##1) measured the last four

of these components of gender identity in preadoles

cent children and found the components to be rela

tively independent, to be fairly stable over a school

year, and to relate to ad*ustment (i.e., selfesteem and

peer acceptance) in different ways. ender typicality

and gender contentedness were favorably related to

ad*ustment, whereas felt pressure and intergroup bias

were negatively associated with ad*ustment. ?ins be

tween the gender identity constructs and the ad*ust

ment indees remained significant when children's

() #3###2$@#3@#/####-$@#°C 2##3 "lenum "ublishing

Corporation

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



perceptions of selfefficacy for a wide variety of

setyped activities were statistically controlled. This

suggests that the gender identity constructs carry im

plications for ad*ustment beyond selfperceptions of

specific selined competencies.

The purposes of the present report are twofold.

The first is to offer a brief, and somewhat specula

tive, account of the development of the various

gender identity components. The second purpose is

empirical and represents an attempt to substantiate

the valid ity of the gender identity constructs by

demonstrat ing theoretically meaningful lins

between measures of the constructs and multiple

indees of psychoso cial functioning in

preadolescent children. Aote that although the

developmental account provided in the first part of

the article deals with development across a rather

broad age span (i.e., the preschool years through

early adolescence), the empirical part of the article is based on data collected only from preadoles cent

children. Thus, the empirical part is not intended as a

test of the developmental model presented in the first

part. Be begin with the developmental account and

then turn to the present study.

G#*!#R I!#*+I+Y I*

!#,#L%PM#*+AL C%*+#-+

8t is liely that the earliest emerging of the gender

identity components is membership nowledge. This

aspect of gender identity develops in a seuence of

steps (7laby D :rey, 1-6$). 4y the age of 2.$ or 3years, most children evidence basic membership

nowledge by correctly answering the uestion E;re

you a boy or a girlFG, but it is not until several years

later that children attain gender constancy, or

understand that their se remains invariant across

time and changes in surface appearance (e.g., hair

length). 4y age or 6, nearly all children attain full

gender constancy, thereby eliminating withinse

variability on this facet of gender identity. Thus,

beyond this age, membership nowledge cannot

account for withinse individual differences in other

variables, such as psychosocial ad *ustment. This

aspect of gender identity, then, is not a focus of the present study.

;lthough full gender constancy is not attained

until age or 6, the basic membership nowledge

usually achieved by age 3 may be sufficient to set

in motion a number of Eintergroup processesG that

prompt preschoolers to interact predominantly in

samese groups, a phenomenon nown as se segre

gation (accoby, 1--/). 8t appears that when children

(or adults) believe that they share membership in a

group, a number of identity validation processes

come into play. These include attraction to the in

group, preferential treatment of the ingroup, and

devalua tion and homogeni5ation of the outgroup

(Ta*fel D Turner, 1-6-). The se segregation that

derivesfrom

theseintergroup

processes is

important, largely be cause boys' and girls' groups

sociali5e different be haviors and social rules

(accoby, 1--/).

"reschool children's basic nowledge of their

gender and the intergroup processes it inspires prob

ably provide the roots for development of three of

the gender identity components proposed by !gan

and "erry (2##1)Hintergroup bias, felt pressure, and

gender contentedness. 8ndividual differences in these

components may be slight at first. 9uring preschool,

intergroup bias may be a normative, natural con

seuence of intergroup processes. owever, with

advancing age and sociali5ation, strong samesefavoritism is liely to become increasingly imma

ture, inappropriate, and socially problematic (!gan

D "erry, 2##1+ "owlishta, 1--$). 7trong felt

pressure for gender conformity also is normative

for young children, who tend to regard gender

stereotypes as moral imperatives. This early sense of

pressure is dif ficult to trace to specific social

learning eperiences (accoby, 1--/). ;s children

mae the transition into elementary school, they rela

their rigidly held gender rules, gender conformity is

seen more as a matter of choice, and felt pressure

for gender conformity sub sides. owever, for some

older children felt pressure remains strong. "ost preschool felt pressure may be due to

developmental delay, but additional factors, such as

intro*ection of socially imposed values, prob ably

also contribute (4em, 1--3+ 4ussey D 4andura,

1---). ender contentedness also begins during the

preschool period. :or most children, contentment

with one's gender is high, probably because of inter

group cognitions and the gratifying samese affilia

tions they promote. owever, some preschoolers are

gender dysphoric. 8n etreme cases, such children may

be diagnosed with gender identity disorder, especially

if they also ehibit strong crossgendertyped behav

ior (4radley D ucer, 1--#+ reen, 1-/6+ =eers,1-/$). !arly gender dissatisfaction may continue for

many years. 8n addition, some children may develop

gender discontentment at a later age, perhaps if they

find a strongly desired activity to be off limits because

it is deemed gender inappropriate.

;s children move into the elementary school

years, the samese peer group continues to be a

ma*or contet for social interaction and sociali5ation,

but advances in cognitive developmentHimproved



Gender Identity and Adjustment (

social comparison sills, the ability to infer stable

traits in the self, and the ability to imagine what the

collective other is thining about the selfHset the

stage for emergence of the fifth component of gender

identityHan estimate of one's gender typicality. Iudg

ments of gender typicality are of great importance to

preadolescents (0agan, 1-%+ 0ohlberg, 1--+7pence

D 4ucner, 1--$), despite the fact that felt pressure

for gender conformity is subsiding at this age. 8n mid

dle childhood, children have a strong intrinsic desire

to E*oin in,G to feel they belong, and to see themselves

as not terribly different from samese others.

9espite the importance that children attach to fit

ting in with their samese peers, within each se there

is ample room for children to reach different con

clusions about their gender typicality (0agan, 1-%+

7pence, 1-/$). ;lthough children's groups remain

strongly segregated by se throughout childhood,

within each se children vary greatly with respect

to how much they ehibit prototypical gendertyped

behaviors (arris, 1--$+ accoby, 1--/). 7uch

within se variations in gender typing provide the

raw ma terial on which children cognitively

operate to es timate their gender typicality.

"resumably, children reach a summary *udgment of

their typicality by in tegrating several inds of

information, including self observation of salient

gendertyped attributes, social comparison, and

appraisals communicated by signif icant others.

Thus, a sense of gender typicality is cognitively

constructed.8t is important to note that a child's sense of

overall gender typicality cannot be assumed to be

isomorphic with the child's selfperception of any

specific gendertyped attribute (e.g., agentic or com

munal traits). The degree to which children ehibit

attributes typical of their gender is only modestly

correlated across different domains of gender typing

(e.g., personality traits, toy and activity preferences,

relationship partner preferences, academic pursuits,

occupational preferences, fantasy life, and nonverbal

characteristics such as styles of speech, gesture, and

dress+ uston, 1-/3+ =uble D artin, 1--/). There

fore, selfperceived gender typing in any single domain cannot be taen as a standin for overall felt gen

der typicality. ; child's estimate of his or her overall

gender typicality represents an idiosyncratic weight

ing and integrating of selfperceptions of diverse

gendertyped attributes (!gan D "erry, 2##1+

7pence,

1--3+ 7pence D 4ucner, 1--$). The specific gender

typed attributes that contribute most strongly to one's

overall sense of gender typicality will vary from child

to child, though at some points in development certain

aspects of selfperceived gender typing are liely to be

influential for many children (e.g., a typical or atypical

seual orientation may contribute strongly to most

early adolescents' sense of gender typicality). 8mpor

tantly, the fact that multiple gendertyped attributes

contribute to children's sense of gender typicality pro

vides some fleibility to children in how a sense of

gender typicality can be achieved. :urthermore, the

cognitive sills that come with the advent of "iage

tian concrete operations (e.g., compensation and con

servation) allow children to engage in compensatory

identity Erepair wor.G :or eample, a boy who ues

tions his gender typicality because of poor athletic

ability might restore his sense of typicality by

succeed ing in an alternate maletyped arena, such

as math or science (7pence D 4ucner, 1--$).

Aonetheless, some children will be unable to

perceive in themselves a salient and valued same

gendertyped attribute that imparts a sense of gender typicality, or will perceive in themselves a

salient crossgendertyped attribute that undermines

a sense of gender typicality. These children may be

prone to a persistent sense of gender atypicality that

lasts perhaps many years.

This brief synopsis of the development of the

components of gender identity suggests that the pe

riod of middle childhood presents important chal

lenges to children on the gender identity develop

ment front. 9uring this period, it is normative and

epected that children relinuish or suppress certain

oncecherished but now developmentally immature

components of gender identity, namely, intergroup bias and felt pressure for gender conformity. ;t the

same time, children are struggling to achieve and con

solidate a new ind of gender identityHa sense of

gender typicality. :or some children, this will not be

easy, because, as noted, processes of withingroup dif

ferentiation and social comparison present children

with ample opportunity to uestion their typicality

on genderprototypical dimensions, and not all chil

dren will succeed in the compensatory identity repair

wor needed to achieve a stable and confident sense

of gender typicality. oreover, for some children, the

same factors that undermine a sense of gender typ

icality are liely also to threaten a sense of gender contentedness.

+/# PR#&#*+ &+0!Y

The present research was designed to garner fur

ther support for !gan and "erry's multidimensional

model of gender identity (!gan D "erry, 2##1).



=elations between the gender identity constructs

and a broad array of ad*ustment indees were

eamined. !gan and "erry found predictable associa

tions between the gender identity components and

two indees of ad*ustmentHselfesteem and peer

acceptanceHbut the inferences that could be drawn

from using only these two measures of ad*ustment

were limited. The selfesteem assessment was limit

ing because the gender identity and selfesteem mea

sures were all selfreported, and shared method vari

ance may have contributed to associations between

them. The peer acceptance assessment was also lim

ited because children may be lied or dislied by peers

for many different reasons. :or eample, children are

about as liely to be re*ected by peers for ehibit

ing eternali5ing problems (e.g., aggression) as they

are for displaying internali5ing symptoms (e.g., so

cial withdrawal+ odges D "erry, 1---). 4ecause an

omnibus inde of peer acceptance imparts no infor mation about the social behaviors ehibited by chil

dren, using such an inde precludes testing hypothe

ses about lins between the various components of

gender identity and specific behaviors (e.g., high felt

pressure for gender conformity might predict high ag

gression and low communal behavior for boys but the

opposite pattern for girls).

<ltimately, the validity of a conceptual model

that specifies that gender identity is composed of mul

tiple components, each with uniue effects on ad

*ustment or behavior, reuires supportive longitudi

nal evidence. owever, before epensive longitudinal

wor is undertaen, it would be advisable to have evidence that the various gender identity components

relate concurrently to a more informative set of cri

terion ad*ustment variables than that used by !gan

and "erry (2##1). athering such evidence was the

purpose of the present study. Jur strategy was to

see whether the gender identity dimensions relate

in specific ways to indees of ad*ustment within the

peer group. 7ocial adaptation among one's peers has

been suggested by numerous theorists to be affected

by gender identity (e.g., 4ugental D oodnow, 1--/+

4ussey D 4andura, 1---+ arris, 1--$+ "ollac,

1--/+ 7roufe, 4ennett, !nglund, <rban, D 7hulman,

1--3), and thus peer adaptation seemed areasonable con tet for assessing the putative effects

of gender iden tity. 8t should be stressed that

although our hypothe ses were derived from causal

models that specify that gender identity influences

(or, in some cases, is influ enced by) peer

adaptation, it was not the purpose of this study to

provide evidence for causal influence+ in deed, the

concurrent correlational design precluded

such inferences. Jur ob*ective was more modestH

simply to see whether sufficient evidence eists for

the construct and discriminant validity of the gender

identity components to mae subseuent longitudinal

investigation a sensible investment.

8n this study, the primary measures of ad*ust

ment were peer reports of five dimensions of so

cial behavior and adaptation& internali5ing problems,

victimi5ation by peers, eternali5ing problems, agen

tic traits, and communal traits. :or comparison with

the peerreported internali5ing problems measure, we

also included two selfreported measures of internal

i5ed distress& global selfworth and selfperceived peer

social competence. lobal selfworth is very highly

correlated (negatively) with selfreport measures of

depression (arter, 1--/)+ selfperceived peer social

competence captures children's sense that they are

lied by peers, have friends, and are otherwise faring

well in the peer group. ypotheses for each gender identity measure follow.

Gender +y1icality

Aumerous theorists have suggested that chil

dren evaluate themselves on a dimension of gender

typicality and suffer discomfort, even despair, when

they come up wanting. Karious bases for the epected

lin between gender typicality and psychological

wellbeing have been suggested. Children who

appraise themselves to be gender atypical may fear

ostracism, denial of privileges, or a loss of protection

by the group (4ugental D oodnow, 1--/+ CaporaelD 4rewer, 1--1). They may also eperience a loss

of selfesteem (Ta*fel, 1-/2), negative selfsanctions

(4ussey D 4andura, 1---), or simply a sense of being

inadeuate as group members (0ohlberg, 1--).

Thus, children with a low sense of gender typicality

should be prone to aniety, sadness, social withdrawal,

selfdeprecation, and other signs of internali5ed dis

tress. :urthermore, because children who display

these characteristics are seen as easy prey by aggres

sive children (!gan D "erry, 1--/+ odges, alone,

D "erry, 1--6), those who feel gender atypical should

be more liely than other children to be victimi5ed by

peers.8t is liely that some children are more prone

to the ill effects of felt gender atypicality than oth

ers. 8n particular, low gender typicality should be

more disturbing for children who feel strong pres

sure for gender conformity than for children who feel

no mandate to conform to gender stereotypes. That

is, children who believe it is important to be gender



conforming yet appraise themselves as atypical should

be maimally distressed.

; final prediction for the gender typicality con

struct is based on the idea that estimates of gen

der typicality are, at least in part, reflections of

selfperceptions of salient genderlined characteris

tics. ;s pointed out, a sense of gender typicality is

not based eclusively on selfperceived gender typ

ing in any single domain (e.g., personality traits) but

rather is a more abstracted, integrated assessment

about the self reached by synthesi5ing diverse infor

mation about one's gender typing. 9espite the fact

that gender identity is multiply determined, there are

reasons for thining that selfperceptions of agen

tic and communal traits assume importance during

middle childhood in many children's assessment of

their male typicality or female typicality. accoby

(1--/) pointed out that preadolescent boys, espe

cially when interacting in samese groups, tend toehibit agentic traits such as competitiveness, dar

ing, and assertion, whereas preadolescent girls tend

to ehibit communal behaviors such as intimate e

change, cooperation, and efforts to maintain social

harmony. accoby stressed that although peer in

teraction remains strongly segregated by se dur

ing this age period, there eist considerable within

se differences in children's tendencies to ehibit the

traits typical of their se. Thus, gendertyped person

ality traits may be one, although certainly not the

only, determinant of felt gender typicality in middle

childhood.

Gender Contentedness

Loung children who are dissatisfied with their

gender to the point of being diagnosed with gender

identity disorder are decidedly unhappy and socially

malad*usted, in part because of the negative social

reactions they incur (=uble D artin, 1--/). Jlder

children under treatment at clinics for strong gender

dissatisfaction also tend to be distressed (ucer D

4radley, 1--$+ ucer, Jwen, 4radley, D ;meeriar ,

2##2). !ven among nonclinic samples, variations in

gender contentment eist and are liely to affect ad

*ustment. The feeling of being at home or not at homein one's body is almost certain to affect satisfaction

with the self. :urthermore, the internali5ing problems

of children with low gender contentedness should be

greatest for children who eperience strong felt pres

sure for gender conformity. That is, children who

wish they were the other se or who desire to

engage in crossse activities should be distressed

mainly when

they perceive their social environment to be telling

them that they cannot be whom they wish to be.

2elt Pressure

8n addition to serving as a moderator of the de

gree to which low gender typicality or low gender

contentedness contributes to internali5ed distress,

felt pressure should be a negative influence on

psycholog ical wellbeing in its own right. ;s

emphasi5ed by 4em (1-/1) and by 4ussey and

4andura (1---), children who feel strong pressure for

gender typing should be less liely to eplore a wide

range of options when de ciding what interests to

pursue or talents to cultivate, and therefore they

should be less liely to settle on op tions that are

maimally fulfilling. This straight*acet ing of self

should result in less satisfaction with the self . Thus,children who are eperiencing high felt pres sure

for gender conformity should show more signs of

internali5ed distress than children who are freer of

gender stereotypes.

The measures used in the present study also per

mitted evaluation of the possibility that felt pressure is

associated with specific gendertyped social

behaviors. 4em (1--3) proposed that internali5ed

societal pres sure for gender conformity disposes

men and boys to use power to achieve dominance and

disposes women and girls to subordinate their own

needs, desires, and interests to those of others. 8n a

similar vein, in his treatise on Ereal boys,G "ollac (1--/) argued that felt pressure disposes boys to

suppress communal be haviors and to hide feelings

of weaness, sadness, fear, and tenderness. These

considerations suggest the hypothesis that felt

pressure causes children not only to tae on negative

components of samegender stereotypes (e.g.,

antisocial tendencies for boys, sub servience for

girls) but also to shun positive compo nents of other

gender stereotypes (e.g., communal be havior for

boys, agentic traits for girls).

Interrou1 3ias

;s suggested by "owlishta (1--$), intergroup

bias may cause preadolescents to eperience difficulty

with peer interaction. Children who espouse negative

attitudes toward the other se at a time when hetero

seual contacts are becoming more accepted and nor

mative may be perceived by peers as high in hostility

(i.e., eternali5ing problems) or as low in communal

tendencies.



M#+/%!

Partici1ants

;ll children in the third through eighth grades

of a state university laboratory school were invited to

participate. Jf the 33 children in these grades, 2#

(1M+ -3 boys and 113 girls) received written parental

consent for participation+ the children also signed an

assent form. The admissions procedures of the school

are designed to ensure that the demographic compo

sition of the student body reflects that of the state

of :lorida as a whole (/M !uropean ;merican,

1/M ;frican ;merican, 13M ispanic, and 1M ;sian

;merican, with annual household income distributed

as follows& M N#ON16,%--+ 12M N16,$##ON32,%--+

22M N32,$##ON$2,%--+ and #M N$2,$## or more). ;p

proimately eual numbers of children came from

8tems 13O% of the uestionnaire were items de

veloped by !gan and "erry (2##1) to assess gender

typi!lity ( items), gender ontentedness ( items),

"elt pressure (1% items), and intergroup #i!s (/ items).

The items of these scales were randomly interspersed.

TheCronbach $

coefficients for the four scales,respectively, were .6#, .6#, ./3, and .6#. The gender typ

icality scale assessed the degree to which children

thin that their interests, personalities, and competen

cies are typical of their gender. ere is a sample item

from the gender typicality scale (all sample items from

the gender identity scales are from the girls' form)&

7ome girls don't 4<T Jther girls do feel

feel they're *ust they're *ust lie

lie all the other all the other girls

girls their age their age

each grade (31, %2, %#, 3#, 2/, and 3$ third througheighth graders, respectively). Children averaged 11

years months of age.%Kery true

for me7ort of true

for me7ort of true

for meKery true

for me

Measures

Two instruments, a 7elfConcept

Puestionnaire and a "eer Aomination 8nventory,

were administered. These are described net. 4oth

instruments may be obtained from the authors.

Sel"%&onept 'uestionn!ire

This %item uestionnaire contained si scales.

;ll items of this uestionnaire (as well as all items

on all remaining uestionnaires, ecept for the "A8)

were written in the format developed by ,arter

(1-/$) to minimi5e the influence of response biases

(see e ample item below). 7cale scores were

computed by averaging across items and could range

from 1 to %.

The first 12 items of the uestionnaire were

items developed by ,arter (1-/$) to measure glo#!l

sel"% (ort) ( items) and sel"%perei*ed peer soi!l

o+pe% tene ( items). The Cronbach $ coefficients

for these scales were ./1 and .6-, respectively.

% This pro*ect was conducted 2 years after the !gan and "erry

(2##1) study but was conducted at the same school. Thus, there

is some overlap in the participants of the two studies. This overlap

should not pose a problem, because the present pro*ect was not

designed as a replication of the !gan and "erry study but

rather was in tended simply to identify additional ad*ustment

correlates of gen der identity. Aonetheless, it should be

acnowledged that the two samples are not entirely independent.

Jther sample items from the gender typicality scale

are E7ome girls' don't feel that their personality is

similar to most girls' personalities 4<T other girls

do feel . . .G and E7ome girls feel that the inds of

things they're good at are similar to what most girls

are good at 4<T Jther girls' don't feel . . .G The gen

der contentedness scale measured the etent to which

children are happy with their gender and rarely wish

to participate in crossse activities. 7ample items are

E7ome girls lie being a girl 4<T Jther girls don't . ..G and E7ome girls sometimes thin it might be

more fun to be a boy 4<T Jther girls never thin . .

.G The felt pressure scale captured the degree to

which chil dren feel pressure from their parents,

their peers, and themselves for gender conformity.$

7ample items are E7ome girls thin their parents

would be upset if they wanted to play with boys' toys

4<T Jther girls don't thin . . .G and E7ome girls

thin it would be J0 for them to participate in boys'

activities 4<T Jther girls thin it would be wrong

to . . .G The intergroup bias scale assessed the degree

to which children are more liely to attribute positive

ualities, and less liely to attribute negativeualities, to their own se than to the other. 7ample

items are E7ome girls don't thin

$ !gan and "erry's felt pressure scale contained 1# items (!gan D

"erry, 2##1). Be added % items to improve the scale's reliability

and to include more items assessing felt pressure from the self for

gender conformity. The 1%item scale contained $ items assessing

felt pressure from parents, $ items assessing felt pressure from

peers, and % items assessing felt pressure from self .



that girls are more trut)"ul than boys 4<T other girls

do thin . . .G and E7ome girls thin that boys are more

!nnoying than girls 4<T other girls don't thin . . .G

eer No+in!tion -n*entory

"eerreported social behavior and ad*ustment

were assessed with a modification of Biggins and

Binder's "eer Aomination 8nventory (Biggins D

Binder, 1-1). The 8nventory contained $3 items

and included items that tap the following aspects of

social behavior& (a) intern!liing pro#le+s (/ items)+

(b) *iti+i!tion (1# items)+ extern!liing pro#le+s

(13 items)+ !genti tr!its ($ items)+ and o++un!l

tr!its ($ items). The remaining 12 items were positive

fillers (e.g., Ee is a fast runner.G). Children checed

off the names of samese classmates who fit the

behavioral description in each item (unlimited

nominations)+ owing to the length of the inventory,children were not ased to nominate otherse peers

for the items. ; score for each item was calculated as

the percentage of samese classmates who checed

the children's name for the item. ;n initial factor

analysis on the %1 items of interest yielded four

easily interpretable factors that closely conform to

the original assignment of items to constructs, ecept

that items that assess internali5ing problems loaded

along with victimi5ation items on a single factor. 8n

addition, three items crossloaded. ; second analysis

without these three items was run, and it yielded

four pure factors& internali5ing problems (this scale

included victimi5ation items and was composed of

1/ items+ e.g., from the boys' form& Ee says bad

things about himself.G+ Ee gets piced on by other

ids.G)+ eternali5ing problems (12 items + e.g., Ee

always has to have his own way.G+ Ee hits and pushes

others around.G)+ agentic traits (3 items+ e.g., Ee

tries hard to win games and contests.G+ Ee is

brave.G)+ and communal traits ($ items+ e.g., Ee tries

to get along with everyone.G+ EBhen a id is sad, he

tries to mae him feel better.G). ; score on each

scale was calcu lated for each child by averaging the

scores the child received on the items of the scale.

The Cronbach $ coefficients were .-, .-3, .6-, and ./- for the inter nali5ing, eternali5ing, agentic, and

communal scales, respectively.

Procedure

+a4le I. eans and 7tandard 9eviations of easures

4oys irls

easure M S M S /

ender identity measure

ender typicality 3.#2 #.3 2./1 #.2

ender contentedness 3.23 #.% 2.6# #.1:elt pressure 2.%$ #.%3 1.61 #.3-

8ntergroup bias 2.2$ #.$2 2.$2 #.$6

;d*ustment measure

8nternali5ing problems #.2# #.1/ #.1$ #.1$

!ternali5ing problems #.2$ #.16 #.1- #.1

;gentic traits #.$3 #.22 #.%6 #.1-

Communal traits #.%# #.2# #.%6 #.2#

lobal selfworth 3.3# #.$/ 3.33 #.$/

7elfperceived peer social competence 2.-2 #.6 3.#$ #.61

uestionnaires relevant to a pro*ect on attachment

were also administered. ;ll instruments ecept

the "eer Aomination 8nventory were administeredindividually to children in two %$min testing ses

sions by one of several adult females who read the

items to the child. The "eer Aomination 8nventory

was groupadministered to children in their class

rooms in a 3#min session.

R#&0L+&

=esults are presented in three sections. :irst,

se and age differences in the measures are summa

ri5ed. 7econd, intercorrelations among the measures

are presented. The third section reports tests of hy potheses about relations between gender identity and

ad*ustment.

&e5 and Ae !ifferences in Measures

eans and standard deviations of the measures

are given in Table 8, separately by child se. Todiscern significant se and age differences, each

measure was treated as a dependent variable in amultiple regres sion analysis with se and age entered

as simultaneous predictors. Bith age controlled, the

effect of se was significant for eight measures at p

.#$ or better .

Bith respect to gender identity, boys scored higher

than girls on gender typicality, gender contentedness,

and felt pressure, but boys scored lower than girls on

intergroup bias. ;s for the ad*ustment indees, boys

scored higher than girls on internali5ing problems,

The two instruments were administered to

children in the spring of the school year. Jther ;ll p values in this article are twotailed unless otherwise noted.



%. Communal −.3∗∗ −.6∗∗ .2$∗∗ H .16 .#%

eternali5ing problems, and agentic traits, but lower

traits

$. lobal −.#/ −.2#∗ .## .22∗ H .3-∗∗

+a4le II. Correlations ;mong ender 8dentity easures

ender identity measure 1 2 3 %

1. ender typicality H .2$∗∗ .## .2#

2. ender contentedness .31∗∗ H .16 .#

3. :elt pressure −.#1 .1 H .1

%. 8ntergroup bias .#% .1-∗ .%1∗∗ H

Note. Correlations for boys are above the diagonal+ those for girls

are below the diagonal. !ntries are partial correlations with age

controlled.

+a4le III. Correlations ;mong ;d*ustment easures ("eer

=eport and 7elf!steem easures)

;d*ustment

measure 1 2 3 % $

1. 8nternali5ing H .1 −.$∗∗ −.3$∗∗ −.13 −.2-∗∗

problems

2. !ternali5ing .%/∗∗ H .1# −./∗∗ −.2-∗∗ .#$

problems

3. ;gentic −.%#∗∗ −.#1 H .22∗ −.#/ .2#∗

than girls on communal traits.

Bith se controlled, the effect of age was sig

nificant for si measures at p .#$ or better. Bith

increasing age, children reported greater gender typ

icality and greater gender contentedness but reduced

felt pressure and reduced intergroup bias. Jf the ad

*ustment measures, only two showed an associationwith age& older children reported higher global self

worth and higher selfperceived peer social compe

tence than younger children. 4ecause of these sundry

effects of age, we controlled for age in subseuent

analyses.

Intercorrelations of Measures

This section reports the intercorrelations among

the gender identity variables and among the ad*ust

ment indees. =elations between the gender identity

and ad*ustment measures are given in a later section.

&orrel!tions A+ong 1ender -dentity V !ri!#les

=elations among the gender identity variables

are given for each se in Table 88. ost associations

are low, but some are significant. :or both sees, gen

der typicality and gender contentedness are positively

correlated, but it will be seen that the two measures

relate to ad*ustment in different ways. 8t is interesting

that the two EimmatureG forms of gender identityH

felt pressure and intergroup biasHare correlated for

girls but not for boys, although reasons for this are notclear .

&orrel!tions A+ong Adust+ent Me!sures

(eer%Report !nd Sel"%stee+ Me!sures)

=elations among the ad*ustment indees are

given for each se in Table 888. ;lthough many associ

selfworth

. 7elfperceived −.33∗∗ −.#6 .2$∗∗ .1$ .%$∗∗ H

peer social

competence

Note. Correlations for boys are above the diagonal+ those for girls

are below the diagonal. !ntries are partial correlations with age

controlled.∗

p .#$.∗∗

p .#1.

ations are significant and several are strong, it will be

seen that significant associations between the gender

identity measures and the ad*ustment measures are

mostly uite specific and theoretically meaningful.

Relations of Gender Identity to Peer6Re1orted

Adjustment and to &elf6#steem

The relation of each gender identity measure to each ad*ustment inde was evaluated in a

separate multiple regression analysis (% gender identity measures × ad*ustment indees = 2%analyses). 8n each analysis, one of the ad*ustmentindees served as the dependent variable. 7e andage were entered

as firststep predictors+ a gender identity measure wasentered on the second step+ the 3 twoway interactions(age × se, age × gender identity, and se × gender identity) were tested on the third step+ the threeway interaction was eamined on the fourth step. 8nno analysis was the threeway interaction significant.

owever, because se differences in certain relations

of gender identity to ad*ustment had been predicted,

and because several interactions of se with gender identity measure were indeed significant or nearly so

(se moderated the relation between gender typical

ity and agentic traits, p .#$+ the relation between

felt pressure and eternali5ing problems, p .#$+ and

the relation between felt pressure and global self

worth, p .#-), the relations of gender identity to

ad*ustment were eamined separately for each se.

These relations are given in Table 8K. The entries

in



8nternali5ing problems −.3$∗∗∗ −.3∗∗∗

.#2−.1%

.#%−.#2 −.#1 −.#3

!ternali5ing problems −.#6 −.#- −.#% −.2#∗ .1 −.12 .11 −.#3

+a4le I. =elations of ender 8dentity to "eer=eported ;d*ustment (and to 7elf

!steem) ender identity measure

ender typicality ender contentedness :elt pressure 8ntergroup bias

;d*ustment inde 4oys irls 4oys irls 4oys irls 4oys irls

;gentic traits .33∗∗∗ .#$ −.#- −.12 −.#3 −.22∗ .1/ −.#/

Communal traits .1% .21∗ −.11 .# −.21∗ −.11 −.1% −.#3

lobal selfworth .13 .2∗∗ .2%∗ .3∗∗∗ .#$ −.2#∗ .# .#$

7elfperceived peer social competence .%%∗∗∗ .%/∗∗∗ .22∗ .23∗

−.#6 −.21∗ −.#3 .#6

Note. !ntries are partial correlations with age controlled.∗ p .#$. ∗∗ p .#1. ∗∗∗ p .##1.

Table 8K are partial correlations that control for age

and thus indicate, for each se, the significance of the

relation of the gender identity measure to the ad*ust

ment measure with age controlled. The significance of

the partial correlation is identical to the significancethat would be obtained on the second step of a multi

ple regression analysis (conducted on either the boys'

data alone or the girls' data alone) in which the ad

*ustment inde is treated as the dependent variable,

age is entered as a firststep predictor, and the gender

identity variable is tested on the second step. =esults

concerning the relations between gender identity and

ad*ustment are summari5ed net, with each gender

identity measure considered in turn.6

1ender 4 ypi!lity

;s may be seen in the first two columns of

Table 8K, both boys and girls who perceive

themselves to be different from others of their se are

distressed. Aot only do their peers perceive them to

possess in ternali5ing problems, but the children

themselves re port distress, especially

dissatisfaction with their so cial lives.

8t was hypothesi5ed that the internali5ed distress

of children who feel gender atypical would be great

est if the children also felt strong pressure for gender

conformity. To test this hypothesis, three regression

analyses were runHone for each measure of distress(internali5ing problems, global selfworth, and self

perceived peer social competence). 7e and age were

6 7ignificant interactions involving participant age were few, did

not ualify the ma*or findings of the study, and conformed to no

particular pattern. That is, certain effects described ahead were

somewhat stronger for younger children, whereas other effects

were somewhat stronger for older children. 4ecause we did not

advance predictions about moderator effects of age, and to save

space, interactions involving age are not described in this report.

entered on the first step+ on the second step, gender typicality and felt pressure were entered+ on thethird step, the 3 twoway interactions of se × gender typicality, se × felt pressure, and gender typical

ity × felt pressure were evaluated+ on the fourth step,

the threeway interaction of se × gender typical

ity × felt pressure was tested. 8nteractions involving

age were not included, because including them would

have resulted in testing more terms than warranted by

the N .

Jf particular interest was the significance of thegender typicality × felt pressure interaction whentested on the third step. This was significant ( p .#1)only in the analysis on internali5ing problems (in noanalysis was the threeway interaction significant).Be eplored the nature of the twoway interaction

of felt pressure and gender typicality using the pro

cedures recommended by ;ien and Best (1--1).

=esults confirmed that the si5e of the negative as

sociation between gender typicality and internali5

ing problems was a direct function of the degree to

which children reported pressure for gender confor

mity. ;s the level of felt pressure moved from low

(−1 S) to medium (# S) to high (+1 S), gender

typicality became increasingly associated (negatively)

with internali5ing problems, respective 5s = −.2%, p .#$+ −.%6, p .##1+ and −.-, p .##1. Thus, asfelt pressure increased, selfperceived gender atypicality became increasingly paired with internali5ing

problems.

8t was hypothesi5ed that during middle childhood

selfperceptions of agentic traits and of communaltraits contribute, respectively, to a sense of male typ

icality or female typicality. Consistent with this e

pectation, the relation of agentic traits to gender typ

icality was indeed significant only for boys, whereas

communal traits was significantly related to gender

typicality only for girls (Table 8K).



1ender &ontentedness

ender contentedness was positively associated

with the two selfreported measures of selfesteem

for both boys and girls (Table 8K). 8t might ap

pear from Table 8K that gender contentedness is

unrelated to peerreported internali5ing problems,

but it will be recalled that the relation of gender

contentedness to internali5ed distress was epected

mainly for children who eperience strong pressure

for gender conformity (because felt pressure should

cause genderdysphoric children the most distress).

To eamine this hypothesis, three regression analyses

(one for each of the three measures of internali5ed

distress) were run (the regression analysis was similar

in form to that used to test the hypothesis that felt

pressure and gender typicality interactively influence

distress).

The interaction of gender contentedness and felt pressure was indeed significant for all three depen

dent variables (internali5ing problems, p .#1+

global selfworth, p .##$+ and selfperceived peer

social competence, p .#1), and this interaction did

not de pend on child se (because in no analysis

was the

threeway interaction of se × gender contentedness × felt pressure significant). =esults from followup tests using ;ien and Best's procedures (;ienand Best, 1--1) confirmed that the degree to which

low gender contentedness was associated with signs

of distress was a direct function of the degree of felt pressure. ;s felt pressure moved from low (−1 S) to

medium (# S) to high (+1 S), low gender contentedness became increasingly associated with distress&

related to both global selfworth and selfperceived

peer social competence, but this was true only for girls

(Table 8K)./

8n addition, the hypothesis that felt pressure

leads children to shun positive crossse attributes re

ceived support. irls high in felt pressure were low inagentic traits, and boys high in felt pressure were low

in communal traits (Table 8K).

;lthough the interaction of felt pressure and se

was significant when predicting eternali5ing prob

lems, for neither se alone was the association be

tween felt pressure and eternali5ing problems signif

icant. Aonetheless, the pattern shown in Table 8K(felt pressure and eternali5ing problems are

positively correlated for boys but negativelycorrelated for girls) is consistent with the possibility

that felt pressure contributes to the commonly

found se difference in eternali5ing conduct.-

-ntergroup 5i!s

There were no significant associations between

intergroup bias and the ad*ustment indees (see

Table 8K).

Su++!ry !nd Supple+ent!ry An!lyses

!ach of three components of gender identity

(gender typicality, gender contentedness, and felt

pressure) was associated with at least one peer reported inde of ad*ustment for one or both sees.

for internali5ing problems, respective 5s = −.#$, ns+

−.33, p .#1+ and −.1, p .#1+ for global selfworth,

respective 5s = .31, p .#1+ .$/, p .##1+ and ./$,

p .##1+ and for selfperceived peer social compe

tence, respective 5s = .1-, p .#$+ .%/, p .##1+ and

.6/, p .##1.

;n unepected finding was that gender content

edness was significantly related to eternali5ing prob

lems for girls (but not for boys). That is, gender

dysphoric girls were perceived by peers as more ag

gressive, disruptive, and antisocial than other girls.

6elt ressure

;s noted, felt pressure was a powerful modera

tor of the association between internali5ed distress

and gender contentedness (and gender typicality).

:elt pressure also was, as a main effect, negatively

/ 8t will be recalled that the omnibus multiple regression analysis

predicting global selfworth from felt pressure (and se and age)

yielded a nearly significant ( p .#-) interaction of felt pressure ×

se. This interaction contributed to our decision to eamine rela

tions between the gender identity measures and the ad*ustment

variables separately for each se. owever, there is another way

to eamine the interactive influence of felt pressure and se on

global selfworth. This is to test the significance of the se differ

ence in global selfworth at each of several levels (e.g., −1 S/,

# S, and +1 S) of felt pressure. Bhen this is done, there is a

significant ( p .#$) se difference in global selfworth, with boys

scoring higher than girls, only when felt pressure is high. This find

ing may be important. 8t is nown that in early adolescence girls

begin to score lower on global selfworth than boys (arter, 1--/).

The present result raises the possibility that it is predominantly

children who feel strong pressure for gender conformity who are

contributing to the se difference in selfesteem.- 8ndeed, when the significance of the se difference ineternali5ing

problems is tested at each of three levels (−1 S, # S, and +1

S ) of felt pressure, a significant se difference, with boys scoring

higher than girls, is found only when felt pressure is high ( p .

#$).



oreover, for each se, any given peerreported ad

*ustment inde was associated with no more than one

gender identity measure. :or boys, internali5ing prob

lems were associated only with low gender typicality+

eternali5ing problems were not associated with any

gender identity measure+ agentic traits were lined

only with high gender typicality+ and communal traits

were tied only to high felt pressure. :or girls, internal

i5ing problems were associated only with low gender

typicality+ eternali5ing problems, only with low gen

der contentedness+ agentic traits, only with high felt

pressure+ and communal traits, only with high gender

typicality. ost of these findings were predicted (all

ecept the lin for girls between eternali5ing conduct

and gender contentedness).

;ssociations between the gender identity mea

sures and the selfreported ad*ustment indees, how

ever, were more numerous (see Table 8K). 4ecause

certain of the gender identity measures were correlated with one another (Table 88), for each se a mul

tiple regression analysis was run on each selfesteem

measure in which all four gender identity measures

were entered as simultaneous predictors (with age

controlled). This strategy permits assessing the sig

nificance of each gender identity variable with the ef

fects of the other three controlled. :or boys, global

selfworth was significantly predicted only by gender

contentedness ( pr = .21, p .#$), and selfperceived

peer social competence was predicted only by gen

der typicality ( pr = .%3, p .##1). :or girls, however ,two gender identity measures made independent con

tributions to each measure of selfesteem& gender contentedness and felt pressure were both independent predictors of global selfworth ( pr = .3%, p .##1and

pr = −.2-, p .##2, respectively), and gender typi

cality and felt pressure both independently predictedselfperceived peer social competence ( pr = .%$, p 0

.##1 and pr = −.3#, p .##2, respectively). Collec

tively, then, the gender identity variables accounted

for considerably more of the variance in the self

esteem measures for girls than for boys.

!I&C0&&I%*

The results go beyond the findings of !gan and

"erry (2##1) by demonstrating that epected rela

tionships eist between the gender identity measures

and specific social behaviors ehibited in peer interac

tion. Three of the four gender identity measures (gen

der typicality, gender contentedness, and felt pres

sure for gender conformity) bore discriminated and

conceptually meaningful relations with one or more

of the indees of psychosocial ad*ustment. 4ecause

gender identity was selfreported and social behav

ior was peerreported, these associations cannot be

attributed to shared method variance. These results

strengthenthe construct and discriminant validity

of the gender identity constructs (and scales) and indi

cate that longitudinal wor designed to reveal liely

directions of causal influence would be a worthwhile

net research step. 4elow we briefly highlight the sig

nificance of the main findings for each gender identity

construct.

Gender +y1icality

The hypothesis that perceiving the self to be a

typical member of the samese peer group is im

portant to the psychological wellbeing of preadolescent children was strongly supported. Children who

reported feeling different from samese peers not

only voiced distress over their peer relations but in

deed were perceived by peers as depressed, anious,

selfdeprecating, and victimi5ed. The association be

tween low gender typicality and internali5ed distress

was magnified when children reported strong pres

sure for gender conformity, but it was still evident for

children who reported relatively little felt pressure.

These results challenge the view that it is harmful

for children to view themselves as strongly gender

typical. The belief that a perception of the self as

strongly gendertypical is harmful is probably rootedin the mistaen assumption that a perception of the

self as gendertypical necessarily reflects strong inter

nali5ed, selflimiting social pressure for gender con

formity (4em, 1-/1). The present data (as well as

the data of !gan D "erry, 2##1) indicate not only

that gender typicality and felt pressure are uncorre

lated but also that these two components of gender

identity relate to ad*ustment in opposite ways+ high

gender typicality is associated with favorable ad*ust

ment, and high felt pressure is associated with nega

tive outcomes.

Consistent with epectation, gender typicality

was positively associated with agentic traits for boys

and with communal traits for girls. ;lthough this pat

tern supports the view that a sense of gender typi

cality rests in part on the selfperception of salient

genderlined attributes, longitudinal wor is needed

to determine whether genderlined personality

traits actually help shape feelings of gender typicality

over time.



2elt Pressure

;s pointed out above, the present results rein

force the conclusion of !gan and "erry (2##1) that

the real culprit where gender identity is concerned

is not the sense that one is similar to samese oth

ers but rather the sense that one must avoid cross

gendertyped activities. armful effects of felt pres

sure for gender conformity were evident in three ways.

:irst, for both sees, strong felt pressure appeared to

pathologi5e a low sense of gender typicality (and a

low sense of gender contentedness), because the

associa tion between low gender typicality (and low

gender contentedness) and internali5ing problems

was con siderably stronger for children whoreported high felt pressure than for children who

placed less emphasis on gender conformity. 7econd,

felt pressure bore a direct negative relation with

selfesteem, at least for girls. 8t is liely that felt pressure causes girls to veer away from masculine

typed activities and behaviors (e.g., assertion, ris

taing) that bring prestige, ecite ment, and self

efficacy for coping with challenge and stress (4ussey

D 4andura, 1---). Third, and consis tent with the

foregoing point, felt pressure was as sociated with

reduced agentic behavior for girls and with reduced

communal behavior for boys. These re sults suggest

that felt pressure for gender conformity is

potentially a damaging force in children's (espe

cially girls') lives, at least in largely !uropean ;mer

ican and middleclass populations of the sort stud

ied here. ?ongitudinal wor designed to corroboratethat felt pressure predicts deterioration in selected

aspects of children's ad*ustment over time is clearly

warranted.

;nother crucial tas for future research is to

identify the determinants of felt pressure for gender

conformity. 7everal possibilities come to mind. :irst,

general developmental delay may cause some chil

dren to be slow to outgrow the strong felt pressure that

is normative during the preschool years. 7econd, so

ciali5ing agents (e.g., parents) may place pressure for

gender typing on some children, which causes them

to intro*ect the sanctions. owever, it is important to

appreciate that the felt pressure measure is a unifactorial scale that taps felt pressure from diverse sources

(parents, peers, and self+ !gan D "erry, 2##1). This

suggests that felt pressure does not necessarily mir

ror specific social learning eperiences but rather is

a cognitive construction Ethat goes beyond the dataG

to tae the form of a widely generali5ed rule about

the inappropriateness of engaging in crossgender

typed behavior. Third, adverse eperiences in the

peer

group, such as re*ection or victimi5ation by peers,

may cause children to search for ways to fit in+ some

chil dren may conclude that adhering more

stringently to gender roles is the answer .

Gender Contentedness

Two findings with the gender contentedness vari

able are worth note. :irst, gender contentedness was

a robust predictor of global selfworth (when all four

gender identity measures were entered as simulta

neous predictors). ; sense of not being at home in

one's body or a strong wish to engage in the activi

ties, interpersonal roles, or even the nonverbal

stylistic behaviors (e.g., modes of speech, gesture,

and dress) associated with the other se apparently

is uniuely depressing to children (and especially so

if they feel strong pressure for gender conformity).

; second noteworthy finding concerning gender

contentedness was that genderdysphoric girls were

named by peers as more aggressive, disruptive, and

ar gumentative (i.e., as having more eternali5ing

prob lems) than other girls. 8t is unclear whether the

girls' aggression is a reaction to dissatisfaction with

being a girl or whether gender discontentment is a

rational i5ation by aggressive girls (E8f only 8 were

a boy, it would be oay for me to act lie this.G). 8f

this finding replicates in subseuent research, it will

be important to untangle the direction of causality.

Interrou1 3ias

8ntergroup bias was unrelated to any ad*ustment

inde. !gan and "erry (2##1) found signs of poorer

ad*ustment (i.e., lower selfperceived peer social com

petence and less acceptance by male peers) for chil

dren who epressed the belief that their se was su

perior to the other, but there was no evidence in

the present study that ingroup favoritism was dis

advantageous to ad*ustment. ;lthough ingroup fa

voritism may not be reliably lined directly with

the indees of ad*ustment studied here, it may serve

as an important moderator of the effects of certain

contetual cues on children's functioning. :or e

ample, children with strong intergroup bias may be

less liely to cooperate, or more liely to compete,

with otherse peers, or they may have more diffi

culty resolving conflicts or forming intimate relations

with otherse persons (4igler, 1--$+ "owlishta, 1--$).

These possibilities might be eplored in subseuent

research.



Conclusions

This study yielded a rich set of theoretically

meaningful and discriminated relations between

the components of gender identity and multiple

indees of personal and social ad*ustment within

the peer group. any of the relations suggest the

operation of causal processes that, if confirmed in

subseuent longitudinal research, are of consider

able social significance. The potentially deleterious

effects of felt pressure for gender conformity on

preadolescent girls' selfesteem and agentic compe

tencies is especially a matter for concern. owever ,

until the necessary longitudinal wor is conducted,

it is important not to assume the operation of any

specific causal process. The results of the present

investigation indicate only that longitudinal wor on

causal processes is warranted, not that the putative

causal processes are indeed responsible for theassociations.

4elow we briefly restate the value of a multi

dimensional model of gender identity and tell how

the results support such a model. Be then com

ment on how the present multidimensional per

spective fits with other influential perspectives on

gender .

; multidimensional approach to gender iden

tity is valuable because it draws attention to the fact

that gender identity development does not reduce to

the unfolding of a single entity but rather involves

the development of several component entities.

7ome of these components are more normative atcertain developmental periods than at others. ;s

early as middle childhood, healthy gender identity

develop ment entails a rebalancing actHletting go of

develop mentally immature forms of gender identity

(i.e., felt pressure for gender conformity and

intergroup bias), consolidating one's contentment

with one's gender assignment, and grappling

successfully with the chal lenges posed by the newly

emerging ability and urge to compare oneself with

samese others on gender typical attributes (i.e.,

perceiving sufficient gender typed ualities in the

self to feel comfortably gen der typical).

oreover, how certain gender identity componentsare configured relative to one another in the child's

psyche carries important implications for mental

health+ the combination of high felt pressure and low

felt gender typicality (or low gender content edness)

is particularly problematic for children's psy

chological wellbeing.

The data of the present study support ey points

of the foregoing analysis. 9uring the preadolescent

age period studied, intergroup bias and felt pres

sure for gender conformityHnormative components

of gender identity in earlier yearsHdecreased with

age, whereas gender typicality and gender contented

ness increased with age. ost of these components of

gender identity (all eceptintergroup

bias) were dif

ferentially associated in theoretically epected ways

not only with selfesteem but also with peer re

ports of specific modes of adaptation within the peer

group.

:or the past uarter century, theory and

research that lin gender identity to ad*ustment

have been dominated by androgyny theory, or the

notion that mental health is promoted by a

perception of the self as both masculine and

feminine (e.g., 4em, 1-/1). Conceptual and

methodological problems have char acteri5ed this

approach, however. These problems have been

reviewed etensively by !gan and "erry (2##1) and by 7pence (1-/$, 1--3+ 7pence D 4ucner,

1--$) and will not be reiterated here. Aonetheless,

it is worthwhile to underscore briefly several cen

tral differences between the androgyny approach and

the present one. :irst, the androgyny perspective re

gards an overall sense of samegender typicality as

orthogonal to an overall sense of othergender typi

cality. :or reasons discussed by !gan and "erry (2##1,

pp. %#O%1), it is unliely that the two summary

senses of same and othergender typicality are or

thogonal dimensions+ it is more liely that they func

tion as opposite ends of a single continuum (e.g., with

a strong sense of othergender typicality implying reduced samegender typicality). 8t is for this reason

that !gan and "erry developed only a single, uni

dimensional measure of gender typicality. 7econd,

androgyny researchers believe that it is possible to

infer an individual's overall senses of same and other

gender typicality (e.g., a boy's felt EmasculinityG and

EfemininityG) from selfperceptions in a single do

main of se typing, namely, personality traits. That

is, selfperceived agentic traits presumably inde

one's overall felt masculinity, and selfperceptions of

com munal traits presumably inde one's overall felt

femi ninity. 8n contrast, in the present approach,

children's selfperceived overall gender typicalityreflects an id iosyncratic integration of diverse

information about one's gender typing in multiple

domains (e.g., one child may assign great weight to

selfperceived non verbal stylistic ualities but only

little weight to self perceived agentic or communal

traits, whereas an other child may employ a

different calculus). Thus, in the present approach,

gender typicality is assessed in a global summary

sense, not in terms of selfperception



of any specific aspect of gender typing.1# Third, in the

androgyny approach, felt pressure for gender confor

mity is believed to be inferable from the degree of bal

ance between one's overall felt masculinity and one's

overall felt femininity, and therefore there is no need

to measure felt pressure independently of felt gender typicality. 8n other words, it is assumed that people

who perceive themselves as highly samese typical

(and as low otherse typical) are the way they are

because they are eperiencing high felt pressure. 4e

cause of this reasoning, androgyny researchers

predict that persons high in gender typicality will be

disadvan taged in developmentHthey presumably

are eperi encing the high felt pressure for gender

conformity that straight*acets healthy development

of self. 8n the present perspective, there is no

necessary rela tion between selfperceived gender

typicality and felt pressure for gender conformity,

and thus it is clearly important to assess felt pressureand gender typicality using different measures.

oreover, gender typicality and felt pressure are

believed to have opposite effects on mental health.

9espite their profound differences in concep

tual assumptions and research methodologies, both

the androgyny perspective and the present one share

an important predictionHthat felt pressure for gen

der conformity is harmful, especially for girls. This

hypothesis has now received preliminary (concurrent

correlational) support from two studies that have used

a separate direct measure of felt pressureHthe !gan

and "erry (2##1) study and the present one. owever ,

confirmation of the hypothesis that felt pressure promotes malad*ustmentHa hypothesis that originated

with androgyny theoryHdoes not imply confirma

tion of the androgyny theorists' companion hypothe

sis that perceiving the self to be strongly gender typi

cal is also harmful. =esults of the !gan and "erry and

present studies in fact are more consistent with the

1# The fact that selfperceived agentic traits are relatively uncorre

lated with selfperceived communal traits encouraged androgyny

researchers to view overall samese typicality and overall other

se typicality as orthogonal dimensions. owever, for many do

mains of gender typing other than personality traits, maletypical behavior and femaletypical behavior may be strongly negatively

correlated rather than orthogonal. :or eample, among adults a

preference for female se partners (maletypical seual orienta

tion) and a preference for male se partners (femaletypical se

ual orientation) tend to be strongly negatively correlated rather

than uncorrelated. 8n any case, for reasons summari5ed by !gan

and "erry (2##1), selfperceptions of overall samegender typi

cality and of overall othergender typicality are more liely to be

negatively related than to be orthogonal.

view that feeling gender typical is salutary rather than

harmful, at least among children of the ages studied

here.

8n recent years, a trend in the study of gender ef

fects in social cognition and social behavior has been

a focus on contetual influences (9eau D ?a:rance,1--/+ 9eau D a*or, 1-/6+ accoby, 1--/). :or e

ample, the se of one's interaction partner(s), such as

the ratio of boys to girls in a play group or the ratio of

men to women in a wor place, is a ma*or influence

on genderrelevant cognitions and action tendencies.

The study of contet effects is sometimes presented

as an approach to researching gender that is alter

native to an approach that rests on the appreciation

of individual differences in gender identity. owever ,

advances in understanding gender are liely to derive

from researching contetual and identity factors con

*ointly rather than separately. There are various ways

that contet and identity might wor together to affect behavior. ender identity might affect the con

tets that children choose or create for themselves.

ender identity might also mediate or, more liely,

moderate contetual influences on children's behav

ior. :or eample, gender typicality might moderate

children's tendencies to imitate, or to infer their self

efficacy from, models of a particular se+ gender con

tentedness or felt pressure might govern children's

willingness to perform rewarding crossgender op

tions when pitted against lowerpaying samegender

options+ intergroup bias might predict the degree

to which children engage in uncooperative or hos

tile interactions with otherse persons or groups. 8tis also possible that combinations of gender iden

tity components govern reactions to contetual cues.

:or eample, boys and men who eperience high

felt pressure for gender conformity along with high

intergroup bias might be especially prone to have

hostile reactions to ambiguous provocations by girls

and women, thereby encouraging abuse of female

interaction partners (Capaldi, 9ishion, 7toolmiller ,

D Loerger, 2##1). Thus, the study of contet and

the study of gender identity should proceed hand in

hand.

AC"*%$L#!GM#*+&

Be than the teachers and students of the ;. 9.

enderson <niversity 7chool for their generous co

operation with this pro*ect. This research was sup

ported by rant 1=J193/2/# from the Aational

8nstitute of Child ealth and uman 9evelopment.



R#2#R#*C#&

;ien, ?. 7., D Best, 7. . (1--1). Multiple regression7 esting !nd interpreting inter!tions. Aewbury "ar, C;& 7age.

4em, 7. ?. (1-/1). ender schema theory& ; cognitive account of se typing. sy)ologi!l Re*ie(, 88, 3$%O3%.

4em, 7. ?. (1--3). )e lenses o" gender7 4r!ns"or+ing t)e de#!teon sexu!l ineu!lity. Aew aven, CT& Lale <niversity "ress.4igler, =. 7. (1--$). The role of classification sill in moderating

en vironmental effects on children's gender stereotyping& ;study of the functional use of gender in the classroom. &)ild /e*el% op+ent , :: , 1#62O1#/6.

4radley, 7. I., D ucer, 0. I. (1--#). ender identity disorder and psychoseual problems in children and adolescents.&!n!di!n ;ourn!l o" sy)i!try, 3<, %66O%/.

4ugental, 9. 4., D oodnow, I. I. (1--/). 7ociali5ation processes.8n A. !isenberg (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3.So% i!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent ($th ed., pp.3/-O %2). Aew Lor&Biley.

4ussey, 0., D 4andura, ;. (1---). 7ocial cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. sy)ologi!l

Re*ie(, ?0: ,6O613.

Capaldi, 9. ., 9ishion, T. I., 7toolmiller, ., D Loerger, 0.(2##1).

;ggression toward a female partner by atris young men&The contribution of male adolescent friendships. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 3@ , 1O63.

Caporael, ?. =., D 4rewer, . 4. (1--1). The uest for humannature& 7ocial and scientific issues in evolutionary psychology. ;ourn!l o" Soi!l -ssues, 4@ , 1O-.

9eau, 0., D ?a:rance, . (1--/). ender. 8n 9. T. ilbert, 7. T.:ise, D . ?ind5ey (!ds.), =!nd#oo> o" soi!l psyology(Kol. 1, pp. 6//O/26). Aew Lor& crawill.

9eau, 0., D a*or, 4. (1-/6). "utting gender into contet& ;ninteractive model of genderrelated behavior. syologi!l

Re*ie(, 94, 3-O3/-.!gan, 7. 0., D "erry, 9. . (1--/). 9oes low selfregard

invite victimi5ationF /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 34, 2--O3#-.!gan, 7. 0., D "erry, 9. . (2##1). ender identity& ;

multidimen sional analysis with implications for psychosocialad*ustment. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology, 3@ , %$1O%3.

reen, =. (1-6%). Sexu!l identity on"lit in )ildren !nd !dults. AewLor& 4asic 4oos.

reen, =. (1-/6). )e Asissy #oy syndro+eB !nd t)e de*elop+ent

o" o+osexu!lity. Aew aven, CT& Lale <niversity "ress.arris, I. =. (1--$). Bhere is the child's environmentF ; group so

ciali5ation theory of development. sy)ologi!l Re*ie(, ?02,%$/O%/-.

arter, 7. (1-/$). )e Sel"%ereption ro"ile "or &)ildren7 Re*i%

sion o" t)e erei*ed &o+petene S!le "or &)ildren (+!nu!l).9enver, CJ& <niversity of 9enver .

arter, 7. (1--/). The development of selfrepresentations. 8n A.!isenberg (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3.Soi!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent (pp. $$3O 16). Aew Lor& Biley.

odges, !. K. !., alone, . I., D "erry, 9. . (1--6).8ndividual ris and social ris as interacting determinants of victimi5a tion in the peer group. /e*elop+ent!l sy)ology,33, 1#32O 1#3-.

odges, !. K. !., D "erry, 9. . (1---). "ersonal andinterper sonal antecedents and conseuences of victimi5ation

by peers. ;ourn!l o" erson!lity !nd Soi!l sy)ology, @: ,66O/$.

uston, ;. C. (1-/3). 7etyping. 8n !. . etherington (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 4. Soi!li!tion, person!l% ity, !nd soi!l de*elop+ent (%th ed., pp. 3//O%6). Aew Lor& Biley.

0agan, I. (1-%). ;cuisition and significance of se typing andse role identity. 8n . ?. offman D ?. B. offman (!ds.), Re*ie( o" )ild de*elop+ent rese!r) (Kol. 1, pp. 136O1/). Aew Lor& =ussell 7age.

0ohlberg, ?. (1-). ; cognitivedevelopmental analysis of children's serole concepts and attitudes. 8n !. !. accoby (!d.),)e de*elop+ent o" sex di""erenes (pp. /2O163). 7tanford, C;&

7tanford <niversity "ress.0ohlberg, ?. (1--). 7tage and seuence& The cognitive devel

opmental approach to sociali5ation. 8n 9. ;. oslin (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" soi!li!tion t)eory !nd rese!r) (pp. 3%6O3/#).7oie, 8?& =and cAally.

accoby, !. !. (1--/). )e t(o sexes7 1ro(ing up !p!rt, o+ing

toget)er . Cambridge, ;& arvard <niversity "ress."ollac, B. (1--/). Re!l #oys7 Resuing our sons "ro+ t)e +yt)s o"

#oyood. Aew Lor& =andom ouse."owlishta, 0. 0. (1--$). 8ntergroup processes in childhood& 7ocial

categori5ation and se role development. /e*elop+ent!l sy%)ology, 3?, 6/1O6//.

=eers, . ;. (1-/$). ender identity problems. 8n ". ;.4ornstein

D ;. !. 0a5din (!ds.), =!nd#oo> o" lini!l #e)!*ior ter!p y(it) )ildren (pp. $/O--). omewood, 8?& 9orsey "ress.

=uble, 9. A., D artin, C. ?. (1--/). ender development. 8n

A.!isenberg (!d.), =!nd#oo> o" )ild psy)ology7 Vol. 3.Soi!l, e+otion!l, !nd person!lity de*elop+ent (pp. -33O 1#1). Aew Lor& Biley.

7laby, =. ., D :rey, 0. 7. (1-6$). 9evelopment of gender con

stancy and selective attention to samese models. &)ild /e%

*elop+ent , 4: , /%-O/$.7pence, I. T. (1-/$). ender identity and implications for concepts

of masculinity and femininity. 8n T. 4. 7onderegger (!d.), Ne#r!s>! sy+posiu+ on +oti*!tion7 sy)ology !nd gender

(Kol. 32, pp. $-O-). ?incoln, A!& <niversity of Aebrasa"ress.

7pence, I. T. (1--3). enderrelated traits and gender ideology&!vidence for a multifactorial theory. ;ourn!l o" erson!lity

!nd Soi!l sy)ology , :4 , 2%O3$.7pence, I. T., D 4ucner, C. (1--$). asculinity and femininity&

9efining the undefinable. 8n ". I. 0albfleisch D . I. Cody(!ds.), 1ender, po(er, !nd o++uni!tion in )u+!n rel!tion%

s)ips (pp. 1#$O13/). illsdale, AI& !rlbaum.7roufe, ?. ;., 4ennett, C., !nglund, ., <rban, I., D 7hulman, 7.

(1--3). The significance of gender boundaries in preadolescence& Contemporary correlates and antecedents of boundaryviolation and maintenance. &)ild /e*elop+ent , :4, %$$O%.

Ta*fel, . (1-/2). 7ocial psychology of intergroup relations. Annu!l

Re*ie( o" sy)ology, 33, 1O3-.Ta*fel, ., D Turner, I. (1-6-). ;n integrative theory of

intergroup conflict. 8n B. . ;ustin D 7. Borchel (!ds.), )e soi!l psy% )ology o" intergroup rel!tions (pp. 33O%6).onterey, C;& 4roos@Cole.

Biggins, I. 7., D Binder, C. ?. (1-1). The "eer Aomination8nven tory& ;n empirically derived sociometric measure of

ad*ust ment in preadolescent boys. sy)ologi!l Reports, 9, %3O

66. ucer, 0. I., D 4radley, 7. I. (1--$). 1ender identitydisorder !nd psy)osexu!l pro#le+s in )ildren !nd !dolesents. Aew Lor&

uilford "ress.ucer , 0. I., 4radley, 7. I., 7ullivan, C. 4. ?., 0usis, .,

4irenfeld ;dams, ;., D itchell, I. A. (1--3). ; gender identity inter view for children. ;ourn!l o" erson!lity Assess+ent , :?, %%3O %$.

ucer, 0. I., Jwen, ;., 4radley, 7. I., D ;meeriar, ?. (2##2).enderdysphoric children and adolescents& ; comparativeanalysis of demographic characteristics and behavior problems. &lini!l &)ild sy)ology !nd sy)i!try, @ , 3-/O %11.

reading 2_gender identity and adjustment in middle childhood

Documents