STRUCTURE AND UNDERLYING VALUE OF PREFERABLE GENDER CHARACTERISTICS AMONG THE STUDENTS OF BELGRADE UNIVERSITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19090/pp.2015.4.395-414Keywords:
gender stereotypes, evaluation of gender attributes, structure of gender stereotypes, higher educationAbstract
The aim of the study was to analyse preferable gender characteristics based on underlying gender stereotypes among the students from the University of Belgrade. The specific objective was to explore the prescribed value and the structure of those stereotypes. The participants were 261 students (69.7% female) from the University of Belgrade, 55.2% from Departments of social sciences and humanities and 44.8% from Departments of technical sciences, from the first to the fourth year of undergraduate studies.
In the first phase of the study, we have used the list of eight pairs of desirable male and female prototypical attributes, and in the second phase, we have used the semantic differential scale for evaluative assessment of those attributes. The results have indicated that typical gender stereotypes are still predominant even in the academic environment. Stereotypes are more pronounced in the male sample than in the female one, i.e. women perceive the sexes as more similar to each other than men do. Both men and women evaluated the desirable “male” characteristics more positively than “female” ones, but men valued “female” characteristics significantly lower than women. We identified four groups of students with different structures of stereotypes. The predominant groups of stereotyping expressed masculinisation of both genders, or clear polarisation based on patriarchal tradition. If we consider students as the important strength for development of gender equality, more efforts should be made for understanding influence and planning policies, and programs targeting gender equality on faculties.
Metrics
References
Absi-Semaan, N., Crombie, G., & Freeman, C. (1993). Masculinity and femininity in middle childhood: Developmental and factor analyses. Sex Roles, 28, 187‒206. doi: 10.1007/BF00299280
Baćević, J., Blagojević, J., Duhacek, D., Džamonja Ignjatović T., Popović, D., Vukasović, M., & Zaharijević, A. (2010). Analiza rodnih dimenzija u univerzitetskom edukativnom materijalu [Analysis of gender dimensions in university education materials]. Beograd: Ministarstvo za rad, zapošljavanje i socijalnu politiku.
Basow, S., & Rubin, L.R. (1999). Gender influences on adolescent development. In N.G. Johnson, M. Roberts, & J. Worell (Eds.), Beyond appearances: A new look at adolescent girls (pp. 25‒52). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bebbington, A. (2002). Sharp knives and blunt instruments: Social capital in development studies. Antipode, 34, 800‒803. doi: 10.1111/1467-8330.00272
Bem, S., (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354‒364. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354
Bruckmüller, S., Hegarty, P., & Abele, A. E. (2012). Framing gender differences: Linguistic normativity affects perceptions of power and gender stereotypes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 210‒218. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.858
Brutsaert, H. (2006). Gender‐role identity and perceived peer group acceptance among early adolescents in Belgian mixed and single‐sex schools. Gender and Education, 18, 635‒649. doi: 10.1080/09540250600980204
Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory of gender development and functioning. In A. H. Egly, A. Beall, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Psychology of gender (pp. 92‒119). New York: The Gilford Press.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble. New York and London: Routledge.
Cacace, M. (2009). Guidelines for gender equality programme in science. Retrieved from: http://www.retepariopportunita.it/rete_pari_opportunita/userfiles/progetti/prages/pragesguidelines.pdf
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Džamonja, T., Duhaček, D., & Popović, D. (2010). Rodna osetljivost u akademskom prostoru: istraživanje stavova prema rodnoj ravnopravnosti na univerzitetu u Beogradu [Gender sensitivity in the academic milleau at the Univesity of Belgrade]. Godišnjak, Fakultet političkih nauka, 4, 455‒480.
Džamonja, T., Žegarac, N., Popović, D., & Duhaček, D. (2009). Ispitivanje stavova prema rodnoj ravnopravnosti u sistemu viskokoškolskog obrazovanja [Examining attitudes towards gender equality within the university educational system]. Godišnjak, Fakultet političkih nauka, 3, 695‒709.
Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social Role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckles & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123-147). New York: The Gilford Press.
Hamilton, D. L. (1979). A cognitive-attributional analysis of stereotyping. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 53‒84). New York: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60259-2
Kessler, S. J., & McKenna, W. (1978). Gender: An ethno methodological approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langen, A. V., & Dekkers, H. (2005). Cross‐national differences in participating in tertiary science, technology, engineering and mathematics education. Comparative Education, 41, 329‒350. doi:10.1080/03050060500211708
Lörz, M., Schindler, S., & Walter, J. G. (2011). Gender inequalities in higher education: extent, development and mechanisms of gender differences in enrolment and field of study choice. Irish Educational Studies, 30, 179‒198. doi:10.1080/03323315.2011.569139
Lynch, I., & Nowosenetz, T. (2009). An exploratory study of students’ constructions of gender in science, engineering and technology. Gender and Education, 21, 567‒581. doi:10.1080/09540250802555424
Mitrović, D., & Trogrlić, A. (2014). Psihologija polnih razlika i sličnosti [Psychology of gender differences and similarities]. Beograd: Sinapsa.
National Science Board (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008 (volume 1, NSB 08-01; volume 2, NSB 08-01A). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14, 535‒569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396
Parker, I. (1992). Discourse dynamics: Critical analysis for social and individual psychology. London: Routledge.
Radović, O. B. (2014). Usklađenost sa rodnim ulogama kao faktor subjektivne dobrobiti u ranom odraslom dobu [Congruence with gender roles as a factor of subjective well-being in early adulthood] (Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija). Filozofski fakultet, Univerzitet u Beogradu, Beograd.
Riley, D. (1988). Am I that name? Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Rossi, A., & Rossi, P. (1990). Of human bonding: Parent–child relations across the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Spellman, E. (1988). Inessential woman. Boston: Beacon Press.
Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex-stereotypes: A thirty nation study. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699‒727. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.699
Wood, W., Christensen, P. N., Hebl, M. R., & Rothgerber, H. (1997). Conformity to sex-typed norms, affect, and the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 523‒535. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.523
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
