10.3.1 Kohlberg's Theory of Gender Development

Kohlberg's Theory

Kohlberg proposed that gender development progresses through three distinct stages:

1. Gender identity
2. Gender stability
3. Gender constancy

The ages suggested for each stage are approximate and reflect that the transition from one stage to the next is gradual.

Gender Identity (2-3 years): At this stage, children are able to identify themselves and others as male or female. They can correctly apply gender labels such as "boy," "girl," "mummy," and "daddy." However, they do not yet understand that sex is consistent across time and situations.

Gender Stability (3-4 years): Children begin to understand that their own sex remains the same over time. However, they may not yet grasp that other people's sex also remains constant. For example, they might be confused by external changes in appearance, such as changes in hair length or clothing, and might think these can change a person's gender.

Gender Constancy (around 6 years): At this stage, children have a complete understanding of gender. They are no longer fooled by external appearances and often have an understanding of the biological differences between males and females.

Evaluation

Support for Gender Constancy

Slaby & Frey's Research:

• Point: Slaby & Frey provide empirical support for the concept of gender constancy.
• Evidence: In their study, children were presented with split-screen images of males and females performing the same task. Younger children spent approximately the same amount of time watching both sexes, while children at the gender constancy stage spent more time looking at the model of their own sex.
• Explanation: This suggests that Kohlberg was correct in assuming that children with gender constancy actively seek out gender-appropriate models. Additionally, Munroe et al. found cross-cultural evidence supporting Kohlberg's theory in countries like Kenya and Nepal, indicating that these stages are universal and generalisable.

Contradicting Research

Martin & Halverson's Study:

• Point: Martin & Halverson's findings challenge Kohlberg's theory.
• Evidence: Their study showed that children under the age of six were more likely to remember photographs depicting stereotypically gender-appropriate behaviour (e.g., women washing dishes) than those showing gender-inappropriate behaviour (e.g., a woman fixing a car). When asked to recall these photographs a week later, children often changed the gender of the person carrying out the gender-inappropriate activity to make it stereotypically appropriate.
• Explanation: This contradicts Kohlberg's theory, which would predict that such adjustments would occur in older children. This suggests that Kohlberg's theory may lack validity, as it does not fully account for the cognitive processes of younger children.

Role of Socialisation:

• Point: Despite its focus on cognitive development, Kohlberg's theory may overlook the significant role of socialisation in gender development.
• Evidence: Bandura and Bussey argue that social processes, such as observation, imitation, and identification with role models, play a more influential role in gender development than cognitive structures alone. For instance, a boy may develop gender-appropriate behaviour by identifying closely with his father.
• Explanation: This suggests that gender development is likely a result of both nature and nurture, with social influences playing a crucial role alongside biological factors.