Basic Assumptions of Kohlberg’s (1966) Gender Constancy Theory.
- The way we think (cognitive development) changed as the result of changes in the brain due to biological maturation.
- Concepts of gender are only acquired when a child is cognitively ‘ready’ to acquire this knowledge.
- Gender development happens in 3 qualitatively different stages.
- Gender development is part of the process of the development of gender roles.
The Three Stages
Stage One: Gender Labelling
This occurs between the ages of 2 and 3 where children label themselves and others as a boy or a girl. It is based on outward appearance only. This label will change as appearance does for example, if a boy grows his hair long, the label may change to a girl. This stage is described by Piaget as pre-operational.
Stage Two: Gender Stability
At the age of 4 , children recognise that gender is consistent over time, that boys grow into men and girls grow into women. Therefore their gender concept is one of stability but not yet consistency. They do not recognise that gender cannot change across situations and still believe that a male can be a female if they engage in female activities. Children under 7 are still swayed by outward appearances so they believe that if a person is wearing a dress, they must be a female.
Stage Three: Gender Consistency
This is the final stage and it happens around the age of 6. They now realise that gender is consistent across situations and time, they have developed fully gender constancy. They will start to learn about gender appropriate behaviour where this hasn’t been appropriate before as they have believed that their gender could change depending on their actions or the situations.
Evaluation:
There is evidence supporting the three stages. Evidence for the age of gender labelling comes from Thompson (1975) who found that 2 year olds were 76% correct in identifying their sex whereas 3 year olds were 90% correct. This shows an increasing ability to label themselves, as predicted by Kohlberg’s theory. Gender Stability was investigated by Slaby and Frey (1975) who when they asked young children questions such as ‘were you a little boy or a little girl when you were a baby?’ or ‘will you be a mummy or a daddy?’ found that they didn’t recognise these traits were stable over time until they were 3 or 4 years old, as Kohlberg predicted. Slaby and Frey also had supporting evidence for the gender consistency stage. When they asked the children questions such as ‘if you played football would you be a boy or a girl?’ and ‘could you be a boy or girl if you wanted to?’ They found that high scorers on both stability and consistency showed greatest interest in same sex models, as Kohlberg predicted. However, Slaby and Freys methods have been criticised by Martin and Halverson (1983) as they argue that the children were adopting a pretend mode and answering based on what they thought they should rather than what they actually thought.
One criticism of the theory is that it is reductionist. The cognitive development approach makes no mention of the influence of hormones and genes. It suggests that changing the way people think can alter gender behaviours but evidence suggests it alters thinking but not behaviour. For example, many couples agree to share domestic roles but never actually put this into practice (Durkin 1995). This could be due to the division of gender roles having a biological basis rather than psychological. Therefore it is reductionist as it doesn’t consider other approaches or explanations.
Kohlberg’s Theory of Cognitive Development
AO1
Basic Assumptions:
- Cognitive development (the way we think) changes due to changes in the brain from biological maturation.
- Concepts of gender are only acquired when children are ‘ready’
- Gender development happens in 3 qualitatively different stages
- GD is part of the process of the development of gender roles.
Three stages:
- Gender labelling (ages 2 and 3) E.G. PIAGET
- Gender Stability (age 4) E.G. MCCONAGHY 1979
- Gender Consistency (around 6)
AO2
P: Support for the three stages
E: 2 yr. olds, 76% correct in identifying their sex vs. 3 yr. olds, 90% correct. THOMPSON 1975
E: G stability- SLABY AND FREY 1975. Asked young children q’s such as ‘were you a little boy or girl when you were a baby?’ or ‘will you be a mummy or daddy?’ They didn’t recognise gender traits were stable over time, until they were 3/ 4, as Kohlberg predicted.
E: S & F also supported G consistency stage. When they asked q’s such as: ‘if you played football would you be a boy or girl?’ or ‘could you be a boy/ girl if you wanted to?’ Found: high scores on stability & consistency showed greatest interest in same sex models, as K predicted.
E: However, S & F’s methods have been criticised. MARTIN & HALVERSON 1983- argues that the children were adopting a pretend mode, answering what they thought they should say rather than what they actually thought.
P: Conflicting evidence from Slaby and Frey 1975
E: G Consistency appeared younger than K suggested- age 5. Suggests- adjustments may be necessary.
E: Also- boys tended to exhibit consistency before girls. HUSTON 1985– easy to get girls to adopt masculine activities than it is for boys to be feminine.
E: Therefore, may also be gender biased.
P: Criticism- reductionist
E: Doesn’t mention- hormones and genes. Suggests- changing the way people think, alters gender behaviours
E: e.g. couples agree to share domestic roles but never do. DURKIN 1995. Could be due to division of G Roles having a biological basis, not psych.
E: Therefore it is reductionist, as it doesn’t consider other approaches or explanations.