HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Study debunks notion that...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:00 AM

Study debunks notion that men and women are psychologically distinct

“Although gender differences on average are not under dispute, the idea of consistently and inflexibly gender-typed individuals is,” Bobbi J. Carothers of Washington University in St. Louis and Harry T. Reis of the University of Rochester explained in their study. “That is, there are not two distinct genders, but instead there are linear gradations of variables associated with sex, such as masculinity or intimacy, all of which are continuous.”

Analyzing 122 different characteristics from 13,301 individuals in 13 studies, the researchers concluded that differences between men and women were best seen as dimensional rather than categorical. In other words, the differences between men and women should be viewed as a matter of degree rather than a sign of consistent differences between two distinct groups.


Raw Story (http://s.tt/1zmVE)

35 replies, 2252 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply Study debunks notion that men and women are psychologically distinct (Original post)
ashling Feb 2013 OP
jberryhill Feb 2013 #1
ashling Feb 2013 #6
jberryhill Feb 2013 #8
slackmaster Feb 2013 #10
jberryhill Feb 2013 #12
seabeyond Feb 2013 #2
Orrex Feb 2013 #16
seabeyond Feb 2013 #17
Orrex Feb 2013 #18
seabeyond Feb 2013 #20
Orrex Feb 2013 #21
slackmaster Feb 2013 #3
Buzz Clik Feb 2013 #4
slackmaster Feb 2013 #5
Buzz Clik Feb 2013 #7
slackmaster Feb 2013 #9
Buzz Clik Feb 2013 #14
dawg Feb 2013 #23
Dash87 Feb 2013 #19
liberal_at_heart Feb 2013 #11
TM99 Feb 2013 #13
Uncle Joe Feb 2013 #15
FarCenter Feb 2013 #22
LittleBlue Feb 2013 #24
jberryhill Feb 2013 #25
LittleBlue Feb 2013 #26
seabeyond Feb 2013 #27
LittleBlue Feb 2013 #28
seabeyond Feb 2013 #29
LittleBlue Feb 2013 #30
seabeyond Feb 2013 #31
sigmasix Feb 2013 #32
seabeyond Feb 2013 #34
Bonobo Feb 2013 #33
snooper2 Feb 2013 #35

Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:02 AM

1. Men aren't going to like this one bit

Because men are not psychologically equipped to appreciate the outcome of this study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #1)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:12 AM

6. This one does

That's why I posted it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Reply #6)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:14 AM

8. Does this one irony much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #8)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:16 AM

10. Irony is women's work

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:17 AM

12. Oh, how ya been!

Starting early today are we?

I gotta couple of slow pitches right over the plate all over this place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:07 AM

2. the myth men are more visual is continually spouted and the myth refuses to die.

people hold onto these beliefs because it works for them. regardless of facts and evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:40 AM

16. Of course you'd say that

Because, you know, you're one of them psychologically different wimmin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #16)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:11 PM

17. an 80's study from a questionairre planted it in peoples mind. study since, hooking up the brain

and actually see the reactions instead of people answering a questionairre in the 80's as gender was expected to answer proves otherwise. not to mention reality.

It is considered an almost forgone conclusion across research disciplines, among pop psychologists of all stripes, and in the general population that men are more “visual” than women when it comes to the way they get turned on. Men, we’re told, are visually aroused, whereas women just need a good sense of humor, and possibly a strong jaw, and they're on board.

This misguided, but pervasive belief can be linked to a host of other gender stereotypes which are further complicated by sexual politics and differences in social power. So arguments which should be challenged, such as the “fact” that men leer more than women do, that they objectify women’s bodies more than women do men’s bodies, and that they just can’t stop watching porn, are explained as somehow being related to a mix of genetics, patriarchy, and simple mindedness.

*

As they hypothesized, the brainwave activity of participants was markedly different when viewing erotic images versus non-erotic images. But a finding they didn’t expect was that female participant’s response was similar to men. In a prepared statement, lead author Andrey P. Anokhin explained:

"Usually men subjectively rate erotic material much higher than women," he says. "So based on those data we would expect lower responses in women, but that was not the case. Women have responses as strong as those seen in men."


The authors propose that previous findings from other studies which found men to have a stronger response to erotic images than women may have as much to do with research methods, as an actual response by men or women.
________________

and yes, since i did not fit the stereotypes women are given, i did challenge and have learned that it is bullshit. does that make me "psychologically different"? or just a person that does not buy into the conditioning and embraces who i am not meeting the criteria society places on me?

i also see how the men and boys in my life are not defined by the societal conditioning of males. i guess i can pretend it is not in my face, but the truth of it does not bother me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #17)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:46 PM

18. I dispute none of that, but I have to wonder...

How does anyone still believe that Women Think One Way and Men Think Another Way?

Regardless of the mountains of data showing that we're all on a big psychological spectrum, the stratified Us-n-Them model doesn't even come anywhere near first-hand experience!

Baffling.


And retrograde.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #18)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 01:15 PM

20. we hear it daily on du.

but, thank you for going further on this so i clearly understand what you are saying. i look around at everyone in my world and see the contradictions to this social conditioning. so it is baffling for me, also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #20)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 01:44 PM

21. Good point--I was looking farther afield than was probably necessary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:10 AM

3. Men and women are the same sex

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #3)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:11 AM

4. That was not the take away message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:12 AM

5. Our Forefathers took drugs

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:14 AM

7. Now you've got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #7)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:15 AM

9. I've heard there's a place just six feet underground...

 

...where you go when you die.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:34 AM

14. Agnostic's Heaven.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 05:24 PM

23. That's a myth.

It's actually only about 4 and a half.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 12:57 PM

19. I hear Washington smoked a mean bowl.

And John Hancock? That signature tells it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:17 AM

11. I can't stand it when fundies try to say that women are born nurturers and men are born

leaders. That's how they justify telling women they have no place in the workforce or in combat. Women are only capable of having babies. Men are capable of anything especially making money and fighting wars because they are born leaders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:23 AM

13. I don't know of a single psychologist male or female who

would disagree with this.

The key quote is this one: “That is, there are not two distinct genders, but instead there are linear gradations of variables associated with sex, such as masculinity or intimacy, all of which are continuous.”

In practice, we still must deal with this gradations of variables that can and are unique enough at times within social and relational contexts in order to constitute apparent differences. Physicality is still unique and requires unique solutions to any problems that may arise based upon gender. And dimensional rather than categorical differences in psychological functions still require unique solutions that address any problems as well.

So, I absolutely have no problem with this study. It confirms what I know from professional experience and still allows me to do my job working with both men and women in unique ways that benefit them both individually, relationally, and culturally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 11:37 AM

15. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, ashling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 05:22 PM

22. Men and Women Are From Earth: Examining the Latent Structure of Gender

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 05:37 PM

24. I don't think the article is stating what people want it to say

For instance, the different effects of testosterone and estrogen on the brain demands a different set of behavior. It makes males in most species more aggressive than females. So when the article states this:

A first-of-its-kind study to be published in the February issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has dealt a devastating blow to the notion that men and women are fundamentally different when it comes to how they think and act.


That just isn't true or is highly misleading.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 05:53 PM

25. It's more like "racial" characterization

There are no lines to be drawn between "races".

That said, is Muhammad Ali "black", yes. Is Kevin Bacon "white", yes. But apart from individuals whom one might casually characterize as being one "race" or another, there is no definition which will accurately categorize all individuals as one or the other.

It's an n-dimensional multivariate space which, at all points, is occupied by someone or another.

There are clusters in that space which, for a lot of individuals, you could make a casual characterization, but it breaks down the same way if you try to apply a categorization scheme which will assign all individuals to one cluster or the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #25)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 06:04 PM

26. Ah, I see

Thank you for that.

Maybe I should try to read the study. I must have misunderstood the article to mean there are no behavioral differences between men and women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #24)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 06:12 PM

27. another myth, testosterone causes aggression.

The popular belief that testosterone contributes to aggressive behavior in humans may be just that — a belief — according to a new study in the journal Nature. The paper suggests that the hormone may in fact lead to fair, and more altruistic, behavior in some situations, causing aggression only when people believe they are under its influence.

Authors of the new study theorize that the actual effects of testosterone, a hormone produced by the male testes and female ovaries that is linked to brain development and sexual behavior, may be somewhat neutral in nature, leading to what researchers call "status-seeking behavior." Under certain conditions, status-seeking could lead to increased aggression — in prison populations, for instance, where studies have shown that inmates in high-security prisons have elevated levels of the hormone — when fighting seems the only way to the top.

But in other situations, a surge of testosterone may prompt people to engage in more cooperative behavior. For the new study, researchers enrolled 121 women to play what economists call the "ultimate bargaining game": one participant is given a certain amount of money and instructed to offer a portion to another participant. The recipient of the offer gets to accept or reject. If the offer is rejected, neither participant gets any money. Before allowing the women to propose their offer, researchers gave them either a dose of testosterone or a placebo.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1946632,00.html#ixzz2K4Jybkx9



http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm


Tired of hormone as cultural myth, as shorthand for swagger and machismo, ferocity and obnoxiousness, the bearskin beneath the three-piece suit?

Do the ubiquitous references to "testosterone poisoning" and "testosterone shock," to "testosterone-fueled heavy metal" and 'testosterone-crazed oppressors" make you feel a bit, well, testy? Do you think it unfair to blame one lousy little chemical for war, dictatorships, crime, Genghis Khan, Gunga Din, Sly Stallone, the N.R.A., the N.F.L., Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf and the tendency to interrupt in the middle of a sentence? Ready to give the so-called male hormone a break and retire all testosterone cliches with a single pound of Iron John's drum?

Retire away. As it turns out, testosterone may not be the dread "hormone of aggression" that researchers and the popular imagination have long had it. It may not be the substance that drives men to behave with quintessential guyness, to posture, push, yelp, belch, punch and play air-guitar. If anything, this most freighted of hormones may be a source of very different sensations: calmness, happiness and friendliness, for example.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/20/us/does-testosterone-equal-aggression-maybe-not.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm


3- Testosterone Causes Uncontrollable Violent Behavior
There is absolutely no reliable evidence that testosterone causes “’roid rage” or any type of violent, aggressive or uncontrollable behavior. No violence, aggression or unpredictable behavior has been seen in studies where men were administered testosterone, even at extremely high doses. In fact, the opposite appears to be true; many men with low T describe being more irritable, or having a short fuse, and this often improves with normalization of testosterone levels. A recent patient treated with testosterone told me that his wife found him “unbearable” to be around before he was diagnosed with low T and subsequently treated; “I’m a nicer guy now,” he said.

http://m.askmen.com/sports/health_200/222_mens_health.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #27)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 06:31 PM

28. I don't care whether they call it "status seeking behavior" or aggression

it's still a difference in behavior. The aggression from testosterone is exhibited in nearly all mammal species. Looks like mental gymnastics to avoid the obvious. Not sure how they'll politicize animal behavior and redefine animal aggression as "constructive inter-personality blah blah blah", but I know soon enough they will

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #28)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 06:38 PM

29. lol... ignore the debunking, double down and suggest women are not capable of fair,

honest, grounded.... or any of the other things testosterone attributes toward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #29)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 06:47 PM

30. Who said anything about being capable?

The article states

A first-of-its-kind study to be published in the February issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has dealt a devastating blow to the notion that men and women are fundamentally different when it comes to how they think and act.


That's obviously not true for the reasons I just gave. This just seems like an attempt to redefine how testosterone influences mammals to act, to use methods and language to avoid admitting there are differences.

If you believe differently, that's fine. We had studies that showed 8 glasses of water a day was good until we had studies showing it was bad. We had studies showing men get less sex if they do housework, and people got angry. In the argument about whether there exists behavioral differences differences between men and women, I'll just go with Mother Nature rather than continue to argue. Will probably turn into a shitstorm with lots of reported posts so



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #30)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 07:07 PM

31. so, you restate a myth as fact and then tell me you debunked the study with myth? ok.

and ya, backacha. hold on to your myths for your personal reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 09:54 PM

32. neo feminist man-haters arent going to like this one bit

This study serves to underline the fact that men can be feminists- heck men can even be leaders in the feminist movement- instead of morally inferior allies. The results of this study throws cold water on the sexist aspirations of extremists on the right and the left.
Poor right wing sexists and neofeminist sexists dont get to pretend that thier chosen bigotry and hatred towards the opposite sex is warranted. But, don't worry- I'm sure there's still enough sexist hatred from both sides to keep them warm at night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sigmasix (Reply #32)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 10:21 PM

34. "neo feminist man-haters" bah haha. really? so fuckin' funny and all about men calling

themselves feminists. what an hoot.

first, where are you seeing "neo feminist man-haters" and what exactly is that? secondly, the issue with men calling themselves feminist has nothing to do with our similarities as people, but the issue is about our experiences in life of patriarchy and male entitlement. which is all conditioning and has nothing to do with who we are as people. hence the terms entitlement and privilege.

lastly, this study really has absolutely nothing to do with your supposed argument on this thread and the discussion in the OP

sounding like an awful lot of hate in your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 09:55 PM

33. Inaccurate headline.

"“Although gender differences on average are not under dispute, the idea of consistently and inflexibly gender-typed individuals is,”"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ashling (Original post)

Tue Feb 5, 2013, 10:25 PM

35. I KNEW they were staring at my ass every time I go shopping

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread