“Outline and evaluate Kohlberg’s cognitive
developmental theory of gender development”
A01 –
GENDER CONSTANCY THEORY
Proposed by Kohlberg – whose concept of gender constancy is derived
from Piaget’s suggestion that young children can’t distinguish between
appearance and reality
Stage 1 – Gender Labelling
Occurs between 2-3 years
Children label themselves and others as boy or girl
This label is based on outward appearance only (e.g. hairstyle, clothes)
Children change gender labels as appearances change (she has short hair
now so she must be a boy)
Towards end of stage, children can label others and themselves as a girl or
boy
Stage 2 – Gender Stability
At approx. 4 years, children recognise gender is consistent over time (boys
become men, girls become women)
Their concept of gender is stable but doesn’t yet recognise consistency
They don’t understand gender is consistent across situations – believing
males can change into females if they engage in female activities
Children under 7 years are still swayed by outward appearances (if they
appear to be a girl they must be a girl)
They lack the ability to conserve (ability to understand that despite
superficial changes in appearance basic properties of an object remain
unchanged)
Stage 3 – Gender Consistency
At approx. age 6 children realise gender is consistent across situations –
they develop full gender constancy (constant across time and situations)
Only at the point when a child acquires gender constancy can they begin
to learn about gender appropriate behaviours ,as behaviour/gender may
change.
A02 –
RESEARCH 1 – Thompson
POINT – supports Kohlberg’s gender constancy theory
EVIDENCE – found that 2 years olds were 76% correct in identifying their sex
whereas 3 year olds were 90% correct
EXPLAIN – supports gender labelling stage of gender constancy theory because
it shows how children can increasingly correctly label themselves in terms of
gender as they get older.
EVALUATE – weakness – criticised for not testing children’s inward cognitions
but just testing their knowledge of society – decreases validity of research –
weakens research support
developmental theory of gender development”
A01 –
GENDER CONSTANCY THEORY
Proposed by Kohlberg – whose concept of gender constancy is derived
from Piaget’s suggestion that young children can’t distinguish between
appearance and reality
Stage 1 – Gender Labelling
Occurs between 2-3 years
Children label themselves and others as boy or girl
This label is based on outward appearance only (e.g. hairstyle, clothes)
Children change gender labels as appearances change (she has short hair
now so she must be a boy)
Towards end of stage, children can label others and themselves as a girl or
boy
Stage 2 – Gender Stability
At approx. 4 years, children recognise gender is consistent over time (boys
become men, girls become women)
Their concept of gender is stable but doesn’t yet recognise consistency
They don’t understand gender is consistent across situations – believing
males can change into females if they engage in female activities
Children under 7 years are still swayed by outward appearances (if they
appear to be a girl they must be a girl)
They lack the ability to conserve (ability to understand that despite
superficial changes in appearance basic properties of an object remain
unchanged)
Stage 3 – Gender Consistency
At approx. age 6 children realise gender is consistent across situations –
they develop full gender constancy (constant across time and situations)
Only at the point when a child acquires gender constancy can they begin
to learn about gender appropriate behaviours ,as behaviour/gender may
change.
A02 –
RESEARCH 1 – Thompson
POINT – supports Kohlberg’s gender constancy theory
EVIDENCE – found that 2 years olds were 76% correct in identifying their sex
whereas 3 year olds were 90% correct
EXPLAIN – supports gender labelling stage of gender constancy theory because
it shows how children can increasingly correctly label themselves in terms of
gender as they get older.
EVALUATE – weakness – criticised for not testing children’s inward cognitions
but just testing their knowledge of society – decreases validity of research –
weakens research support
