A01 –
Proposed by Martin and Halverson – it’s a cognitive developmental theory
of gender
Argue process of acquiring gender relevant information happens before
gender constancy is achieved
Believe basic gender identity is enough for child to be able to identify
themselves and be interested in appropriate behaviours
Schemas
Emphasise importance of schemas – arguing children learn gender
schemas from their interactions with other children, adults and TV
These gender schemas used to organise and structure other info
presented to child (such as gender appropriate toys and clothes)
In-group/out-group schema
In-group → group that person identifies themselves with
Out-group → other groups that person doesn’t identify with
EXAMPLE – females may identify themselves with other girls
When children identify with a group, they positively evaluate the in-group
and negatively evaluate the out-group
This motivates child to be like in-group and avoid behaviours of out-group
Also leads them to seek info about what their in-group does
Children experience in-group/out-group schemas from early age, before
gender constancy
Power of Gender beliefs
GST can explain power of gender beliefs because gender beliefs allow
children to have very fixed gender attitudes because they ignore the info
they encounter that is not consistent with in-group info (e.g. male nurse)
A02 –
RESEARCH 1 – Martin et al
POINT – supports gender schema theory
EVIDENCE – showed 4 and 5 year old children a range of toys. Before children
played with toys, they told them whether the toys were for boys or girls.
Researchers then asked children if they or other children of same gender would
like to play with toys. Found that label given to toy significantly affected
preference child gave to it.
EXPLAIN – supports GST because it shows how children categorise and organise
objects to match gender
EVALUATE – weakness – lack mundane realism – conducted in artificial setting of
a lab – research may not be very applicable to real world – weakens research
support