Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Neuroethics 3/2012

01-12-2012 | Original Paper

Explaining, or Sustaining, the Status Quo? The Potentially Self-Fulfilling Effects of ‘Hardwired’ Accounts of Sex Differences

Author: Cordelia Fine

Published in: Neuroethics | Issue 3/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

In this article I flesh out support for observations that scientific accounts of social groups can influence the very groups and mental phenomena under investigation. The controversial hypothesis that there are hardwired differences between the brains of males and females that contribute to sex differences in gender-typed behaviour is common in both the scientific and popular media. Here I present evidence that such claims, quite independently of their scientific validity, have scope to sustain the very sex differences they seek to explain. I argue that, while further research is required, such claims can have self-fulfilling effects via their influence on social perception, behaviour and attitudes. The real effects of the products of scientists’ research on our minds and society, together with the fact that all scientific hypotheses are subject to dispute and disconfirmation, point to a need for scientists to consider the ethical implications of their work.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hines, M. 2010. Sex-related variation in human behavior and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14(10): 448–456.CrossRef Hines, M. 2010. Sex-related variation in human behavior and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14(10): 448–456.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Baron-Cohen, S. 2003. The essential difference: Men, women and the extreme male brain. London: Allen Lane. Baron-Cohen, S. 2003. The essential difference: Men, women and the extreme male brain. London: Allen Lane.
3.
go back to reference Baron-Cohen, S., R.C. Knickmeyer, and M.K. Belmonte. 2005. Sex differences in the brain: Implications for explaining autism. Science 310: 819–823.CrossRef Baron-Cohen, S., R.C. Knickmeyer, and M.K. Belmonte. 2005. Sex differences in the brain: Implications for explaining autism. Science 310: 819–823.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kaiser, A., S. Haller, S. Schmitz, and C. Nitsch. 2009. On sex/gender related similarities and differences in fMRI language research. Brain Research Reviews 61(2): 49–59.CrossRef Kaiser, A., S. Haller, S. Schmitz, and C. Nitsch. 2009. On sex/gender related similarities and differences in fMRI language research. Brain Research Reviews 61(2): 49–59.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Gur, R.C., and R.E. Gur. 2007. Neural substrates for sex differences in cognition. In Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence, ed, S.J. Ceci, and W.M. Williams, 189–198. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association. Gur, R.C., and R.E. Gur. 2007. Neural substrates for sex differences in cognition. In Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence, ed, S.J. Ceci, and W.M. Williams, 189–198. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
6.
go back to reference Halpern, D.F., C.P. Benbow, D.C. Geary, R.C. Gur, J.S. Hyde, and M.A. Gernsbacher. 2007. The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 8(1): 1–51. Halpern, D.F., C.P. Benbow, D.C. Geary, R.C. Gur, J.S. Hyde, and M.A. Gernsbacher. 2007. The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 8(1): 1–51.
7.
go back to reference Fine, C. 2010. Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference. New York: Norton. Fine, C. 2010. Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference. New York: Norton.
8.
go back to reference Grossi, G. 2008. Science or belief? Bias in sex differences research. In Under-representation of women in science and technology, ed. S. Badaloni, C.A. Drace, O. Gia, C. Levorato, and F. Vidotto, 93–106. Padova: Cleup. Grossi, G. 2008. Science or belief? Bias in sex differences research. In Under-representation of women in science and technology, ed. S. Badaloni, C.A. Drace, O. Gia, C. Levorato, and F. Vidotto, 93–106. Padova: Cleup.
9.
go back to reference Grossi, G, and C Fine. The role of fetal testosterone in the development of “the essential difference” between the sexes: Some essential issues. In Neurofeminism: Issues at the intersection of feminist theory and cognitive neuroscience, eds. R. Bluhm, A.J. Jacobson, and H.L. Maibom. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. forthcoming. Grossi, G, and C Fine. The role of fetal testosterone in the development of “the essential difference” between the sexes: Some essential issues. In Neurofeminism: Issues at the intersection of feminist theory and cognitive neuroscience, eds. R. Bluhm, A.J. Jacobson, and H.L. Maibom. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. forthcoming.
10.
go back to reference Jordan-Young, R.M. 2010. Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Jordan-Young, R.M. 2010. Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
11.
go back to reference Fine, C. 2010. From scanner to sound bite: Issues in interpreting and reporting sex differences in the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science 19(5): 280–283.CrossRef Fine, C. 2010. From scanner to sound bite: Issues in interpreting and reporting sex differences in the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science 19(5): 280–283.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Schwartz, B. 1997. Psychology, idea technology, and ideology. Psychological Science 8(1): 21–27.CrossRef Schwartz, B. 1997. Psychology, idea technology, and ideology. Psychological Science 8(1): 21–27.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hacking, I. 1995. The looping effects of human kinds. In Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate, ed. D. Sperber, D. Premack, and A.J. Premack, 351–383. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hacking, I. 1995. The looping effects of human kinds. In Causal cognition: a multidisciplinary debate, ed. D. Sperber, D. Premack, and A.J. Premack, 351–383. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
go back to reference Choudhury, S., S.K. Nagel, and J. Slaby. 2009. Critical neuroscience: Linking neuroscience and society through critical practice. BioSocieties 4: 61–77.CrossRef Choudhury, S., S.K. Nagel, and J. Slaby. 2009. Critical neuroscience: Linking neuroscience and society through critical practice. BioSocieties 4: 61–77.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kitayama, S., and D. Cohen. 2007. Preface. In Handbook of cultural psychology, ed. S. Kitayama and D. Cohen. New York: Guilford. Kitayama, S., and D. Cohen. 2007. Preface. In Handbook of cultural psychology, ed. S. Kitayama and D. Cohen. New York: Guilford.
16.
go back to reference Bem, S.L. 1983. Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: Raising gender-aschematic children in a gender-schematic society. SIGNS: Journal of Women in Culture & Society 8(4): 598–616.CrossRef Bem, S.L. 1983. Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: Raising gender-aschematic children in a gender-schematic society. SIGNS: Journal of Women in Culture & Society 8(4): 598–616.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Miller, C.F., H.M. Trautner, and D.N. Ruble. 2006. The role of gender stereotypes in children's preferences and behavior. In Child psychology: A handbook of contemporary issues, eds. L Balter, and CS Tamis-LeMonda, 293–323. New York: Psychology Press. Miller, C.F., H.M. Trautner, and D.N. Ruble. 2006. The role of gender stereotypes in children's preferences and behavior. In Child psychology: A handbook of contemporary issues, eds. L Balter, and CS Tamis-LeMonda, 293–323. New York: Psychology Press.
18.
go back to reference Prentice, D.A., and E. Carranza. 2002. What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly 26(4): 269–281.CrossRef Prentice, D.A., and E. Carranza. 2002. What women and men should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly 26(4): 269–281.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Nosek, B.A., F.L. Smyth, N. Sriram, N.M. Lindner, T. Devos, A. Ayala, Y. Bar-Anan, et al. 2009. National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. PNAS 106(26): 10593–10597.CrossRef Nosek, B.A., F.L. Smyth, N. Sriram, N.M. Lindner, T. Devos, A. Ayala, Y. Bar-Anan, et al. 2009. National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. PNAS 106(26): 10593–10597.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bargh, J.A., and E.L. Williams. 2006. The automaticity of social life. Current Directions in Psychological Science 15(1): 1–4.CrossRef Bargh, J.A., and E.L. Williams. 2006. The automaticity of social life. Current Directions in Psychological Science 15(1): 1–4.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Smith, E.R., and J. DeCoster. 2000. Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality & Social Psychology Review 4(2): 108–131.CrossRef Smith, E.R., and J. DeCoster. 2000. Dual-process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality & Social Psychology Review 4(2): 108–131.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Kunda, Z., and S.J. Spencer. 2003. When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin 129(4): 522–544.CrossRef Kunda, Z., and S.J. Spencer. 2003. When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin 129(4): 522–544.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Nelson, T.E., M.R. Biernat, and M. Manis. 1990. Everyday base rates (sex stereotypes): Potent and resilient. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 59(4): 664–675.CrossRef Nelson, T.E., M.R. Biernat, and M. Manis. 1990. Everyday base rates (sex stereotypes): Potent and resilient. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 59(4): 664–675.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Sidorowicz, L.S., and G.S. Lunney. 1980. Baby X revisited. Sex Roles 6(1): 67–73.CrossRef Sidorowicz, L.S., and G.S. Lunney. 1980. Baby X revisited. Sex Roles 6(1): 67–73.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Delk, J.L., R.B. Madden, M. Livingston, and T.T. Ryan. 1986. Adult perceptions of the infant as a function of gender labeling and observer gender. Sex Roles 15(9/10): 527–534.CrossRef Delk, J.L., R.B. Madden, M. Livingston, and T.T. Ryan. 1986. Adult perceptions of the infant as a function of gender labeling and observer gender. Sex Roles 15(9/10): 527–534.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Mondschein, E.R., K.E. Adolph, and C.S. Tamis-LeMonda. 2000. Gender bias in mothers’ expectations about infant crawling. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 77: 304–316.CrossRef Mondschein, E.R., K.E. Adolph, and C.S. Tamis-LeMonda. 2000. Gender bias in mothers’ expectations about infant crawling. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 77: 304–316.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Clearfield, M.W., and N.M. Nelson. 2006. Sex differences in mothers' speech and play behavior with 6-, 9-, and 14-month-old infants. Sex Roles 54(1/2): 127–137.CrossRef Clearfield, M.W., and N.M. Nelson. 2006. Sex differences in mothers' speech and play behavior with 6-, 9-, and 14-month-old infants. Sex Roles 54(1/2): 127–137.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Fuegen, K. 2010. The effects of gender stereotypes on judgments and decisions in organizations. In Social psychology of gender (Advances in group processes, volume 24), ed. S.J. Correll, 79–98. Emerald Group Publishing. Fuegen, K. 2010. The effects of gender stereotypes on judgments and decisions in organizations. In Social psychology of gender (Advances in group processes, volume 24), ed. S.J. Correll, 79–98. Emerald Group Publishing.
29.
go back to reference Heilman, M.E., and E.J. Parks-Stamm. 2010. Gender stereotypes in the workplace: obstacles to women’s career progress. In Social psychology of gender (Advances in group processes, volume 24), ed. S.J. Correll, 79–98. Emerald Group Publishing. Heilman, M.E., and E.J. Parks-Stamm. 2010. Gender stereotypes in the workplace: obstacles to women’s career progress. In Social psychology of gender (Advances in group processes, volume 24), ed. S.J. Correll, 79–98. Emerald Group Publishing.
30.
go back to reference Davison, H.K., and M.J. Burke. 2000. Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56(2): 225–248.CrossRef Davison, H.K., and M.J. Burke. 2000. Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Vocational Behavior 56(2): 225–248.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Isaac, C., B. Lee, and M. Carnes. 2009. Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: A systematic review. Academic Medicine 84(10): 1440–1446.CrossRef Isaac, C., B. Lee, and M. Carnes. 2009. Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: A systematic review. Academic Medicine 84(10): 1440–1446.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Norton, M.I., J.A. Vandello, and J.M. Darley. 2004. Casuistry and social category bias. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 87(6): 817–831.CrossRef Norton, M.I., J.A. Vandello, and J.M. Darley. 2004. Casuistry and social category bias. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 87(6): 817–831.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Phelan, J.E., C.A. Moss-Racusin, and L.A. Rudman. 2008. Competent yet out in the cold: Shifting criteria for hiring reflect backlash toward agentic women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 32(4): 406–413.CrossRef Phelan, J.E., C.A. Moss-Racusin, and L.A. Rudman. 2008. Competent yet out in the cold: Shifting criteria for hiring reflect backlash toward agentic women. Psychology of Women Quarterly 32(4): 406–413.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Uhlmann, E.L., and G.L. Cohen. 2005. Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychological Science 16(6): 474–480. Uhlmann, E.L., and G.L. Cohen. 2005. Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychological Science 16(6): 474–480.
35.
go back to reference Biernat, M., and D. Kobrynowicz. 1997. Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 72(3): 544–557.CrossRef Biernat, M., and D. Kobrynowicz. 1997. Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 72(3): 544–557.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Correll, S.J., S. Benard, and I. Paik. 2007. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology 112(5): 1297–1338.CrossRef Correll, S.J., S. Benard, and I. Paik. 2007. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? American Journal of Sociology 112(5): 1297–1338.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Fuegen, K., M. Biernat, E. Haines, and K. Deaux. 2004. Mothers and fathers in the workplace: How gender and parental status influence judgments of job-related competence. Journal of Social Issues 60(4): 737–754.CrossRef Fuegen, K., M. Biernat, E. Haines, and K. Deaux. 2004. Mothers and fathers in the workplace: How gender and parental status influence judgments of job-related competence. Journal of Social Issues 60(4): 737–754.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Heilman, M.E., and T.G. Okimoto. 2008. Motherhood: A potential source of bias in employment decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(1): 189-198. Heilman, M.E., and T.G. Okimoto. 2008. Motherhood: A potential source of bias in employment decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(1): 189-198.
39.
go back to reference Bowles, R.P., L. Babcock, and L. Lai. 2007. Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103(1): 84–103.CrossRef Bowles, R.P., L. Babcock, and L. Lai. 2007. Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103(1): 84–103.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Eagly, A.H., M.G. Makhijani, and B.G. Klonsky. 1992. Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 111(1): 3–22.CrossRef Eagly, A.H., M.G. Makhijani, and B.G. Klonsky. 1992. Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 111(1): 3–22.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Heilman, M.E., A.S. Wallen, D. Fuchs, and M.M. Tamkins. 2004. Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology 89(3): 416–427.CrossRef Heilman, M.E., A.S. Wallen, D. Fuchs, and M.M. Tamkins. 2004. Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology 89(3): 416–427.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Okimoto, T.G., and V.L. Brescoll. 2010. The price of power: Power seeking and backlash against female politicians. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 36(7): 923–936.CrossRef Okimoto, T.G., and V.L. Brescoll. 2010. The price of power: Power seeking and backlash against female politicians. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 36(7): 923–936.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Rudman, L.A. 1998. Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 74(3): 629–645.CrossRef Rudman, L.A. 1998. Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 74(3): 629–645.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Rudman, L.A., and P. Glick. 1999. Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: the hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 77(5): 1004–1010.CrossRef Rudman, L.A., and P. Glick. 1999. Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: the hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 77(5): 1004–1010.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Rudman, L.A., and P. Glick. 2001. Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues 57(4): 743–762.CrossRef Rudman, L.A., and P. Glick. 2001. Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues 57(4): 743–762.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference Chatard, A., S. Guimond, and L. Selimbegovic. 2007. “How good are you in math?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students' recollection of their school marks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43(6): 1017–1024.CrossRef Chatard, A., S. Guimond, and L. Selimbegovic. 2007. “How good are you in math?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students' recollection of their school marks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43(6): 1017–1024.CrossRef
47.
go back to reference Sinclair, S., C.D. Hardin, and B.S. Lowery. 2006. Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90(4): 529–542.CrossRef Sinclair, S., C.D. Hardin, and B.S. Lowery. 2006. Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90(4): 529–542.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Davies, P.G., S.J. Spencer, D.M. Quinn, and R. Gerhardstein. 2002. Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12): 1615–1628.CrossRef Davies, P.G., S.J. Spencer, D.M. Quinn, and R. Gerhardstein. 2002. Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 28(12): 1615–1628.CrossRef
49.
go back to reference Davies, P.G., S.J. Spencer, and C.M. Steele. 2005. Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women's leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 88(2): 276–287.CrossRef Davies, P.G., S.J. Spencer, and C.M. Steele. 2005. Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women's leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 88(2): 276–287.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Steele, J.R., and N. Ambady. 2006. “Math is hard!” The effect of gender priming on women's attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42(4): 428–436.CrossRef Steele, J.R., and N. Ambady. 2006. “Math is hard!” The effect of gender priming on women's attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42(4): 428–436.CrossRef
51.
go back to reference Lewis, K.L., J.L. Smith, and K.E. Hawkinson. 2011. Tuning out in order to fit in: The effects of gender role expectations and affiliation motives on men's interpersonal sensitivity. In Managing Interpersonal Sensitivity: Knowing when - and when not - to understand others, ed. J.L. Smith, W. Ickes, and S.D. Hodges, 75–97. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers. Lewis, K.L., J.L. Smith, and K.E. Hawkinson. 2011. Tuning out in order to fit in: The effects of gender role expectations and affiliation motives on men's interpersonal sensitivity. In Managing Interpersonal Sensitivity: Knowing when - and when not - to understand others, ed. J.L. Smith, W. Ickes, and S.D. Hodges, 75–97. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers.
52.
go back to reference Sinclair, S., J. Huntsinger, J. Skorinko, and C.D. Hardin. 2005. Social tuning of the self: Consequences for the self-evaluations of stereotype targets. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 89(2): 160–175.CrossRef Sinclair, S., J. Huntsinger, J. Skorinko, and C.D. Hardin. 2005. Social tuning of the self: Consequences for the self-evaluations of stereotype targets. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 89(2): 160–175.CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Sinclair, S., and J. Lun. 2006. Significant other representations activate stereotypic self-views among women. Self and Identity 5(2): 196–207.CrossRef Sinclair, S., and J. Lun. 2006. Significant other representations activate stereotypic self-views among women. Self and Identity 5(2): 196–207.CrossRef
54.
go back to reference Correll, S.J. 2004. Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review 69(1): 93–113.CrossRef Correll, S.J. 2004. Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review 69(1): 93–113.CrossRef
55.
go back to reference Steele, C.M. 1997. A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist 52(6): 613–629.CrossRef Steele, C.M. 1997. A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist 52(6): 613–629.CrossRef
56.
go back to reference Schmader, T., M. Johns, and C. Forbes. 2008. An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review 115(2): 336–356.CrossRef Schmader, T., M. Johns, and C. Forbes. 2008. An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review 115(2): 336–356.CrossRef
57.
go back to reference Walton, G.M., and S.J. Spencer. 2009. Latent ability: Grades and test scores systematically underestimate the intellectual ability of negatively stereotyped students. Psychological Science 20(9): 1132–1139.CrossRef Walton, G.M., and S.J. Spencer. 2009. Latent ability: Grades and test scores systematically underestimate the intellectual ability of negatively stereotyped students. Psychological Science 20(9): 1132–1139.CrossRef
58.
go back to reference Nguyen, H.D., and A.M. Ryan. 2008. Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(6): 1314–1334.CrossRef Nguyen, H.D., and A.M. Ryan. 2008. Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology 93(6): 1314–1334.CrossRef
59.
go back to reference Good, J.J., J.A. Woodzicka, and L.C. Wingfield. 2010. The effects of gender stereotypic and counter-stereotypic textbook images on science performance. Journal of Social Psychology 150(2): 132–147.CrossRef Good, J.J., J.A. Woodzicka, and L.C. Wingfield. 2010. The effects of gender stereotypic and counter-stereotypic textbook images on science performance. Journal of Social Psychology 150(2): 132–147.CrossRef
60.
go back to reference Rydell, R.J., M.T. Rydell, and K.L. Boucher. 2010. The effect of negative performance stereotypes on learning. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 99(6): 883–896. Rydell, R.J., M.T. Rydell, and K.L. Boucher. 2010. The effect of negative performance stereotypes on learning. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. 99(6): 883–896.
61.
go back to reference Ridgeway, C.L., and S.J. Correll. 2004. Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society 18(4): 510–531.CrossRef Ridgeway, C.L., and S.J. Correll. 2004. Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society 18(4): 510–531.CrossRef
62.
go back to reference Valian, V. 1998. Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge: MIT. Valian, V. 1998. Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge: MIT.
63.
go back to reference Graham, T., and W. Ickes. 1997. When women's intuition isn't greater than men's. In Empathic accuracy, ed. W. Ickes, 117–143. New York: Guilford. Graham, T., and W. Ickes. 1997. When women's intuition isn't greater than men's. In Empathic accuracy, ed. W. Ickes, 117–143. New York: Guilford.
64.
go back to reference Ickes, W. 2003. Everyday mind reading: Understanding what other people think and feel. Amherst: Prometheus Books. Ickes, W. 2003. Everyday mind reading: Understanding what other people think and feel. Amherst: Prometheus Books.
65.
go back to reference Ickes, W., P.R. Gesn, and T. Graham. 2000. Gender differences in empathic accuracy: Differential ability or differential motivation? Personal Relationships 7(1): 95–109.CrossRef Ickes, W., P.R. Gesn, and T. Graham. 2000. Gender differences in empathic accuracy: Differential ability or differential motivation? Personal Relationships 7(1): 95–109.CrossRef
66.
go back to reference Koenig, A.M., and A.H. Eagly. 2005. Stereotype threat in men on a test of social sensitivity. Sex Roles 52(7/8): 489–496.CrossRef Koenig, A.M., and A.H. Eagly. 2005. Stereotype threat in men on a test of social sensitivity. Sex Roles 52(7/8): 489–496.CrossRef
67.
go back to reference Leyens, J.-P., M. Désert and J.-C. Croizet. 2000. Stereotype threat: are lower status and history of stigmatization preconditions of stereotype threat? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 26(10): 1189–1199.CrossRef Leyens, J.-P., M. Désert and J.-C. Croizet. 2000. Stereotype threat: are lower status and history of stigmatization preconditions of stereotype threat? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 26(10): 1189–1199.CrossRef
68.
go back to reference Horgan, T.G., and J.L. Smith. 2006. Interpersonal reasons for interpersonal perceptions: Gender-incongruent purpose goals and nonverbal judgment accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 30(3): 127–140.CrossRef Horgan, T.G., and J.L. Smith. 2006. Interpersonal reasons for interpersonal perceptions: Gender-incongruent purpose goals and nonverbal judgment accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 30(3): 127–140.CrossRef
69.
go back to reference Klein, K.J.K., and S.D. Hodges. 2001. Gender differences, motivation, and empathic accuracy: When it pays to understand. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27(6): 720–730.CrossRef Klein, K.J.K., and S.D. Hodges. 2001. Gender differences, motivation, and empathic accuracy: When it pays to understand. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27(6): 720–730.CrossRef
70.
go back to reference Thomas, G., and G.R. Maio. 2008. Man, I feel like a woman: When and how gender-role motivation helps mind-reading. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 95(5): 1165–1179.CrossRef Thomas, G., and G.R. Maio. 2008. Man, I feel like a woman: When and how gender-role motivation helps mind-reading. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 95(5): 1165–1179.CrossRef
71.
go back to reference Smith, J.L., and K.L. Lewis. 2009. Men's interpersonal (mis)perception: fitting in with gender norms following social rejection. Sex Roles 61(3/4): 252–264.CrossRef Smith, J.L., and K.L. Lewis. 2009. Men's interpersonal (mis)perception: fitting in with gender norms following social rejection. Sex Roles 61(3/4): 252–264.CrossRef
72.
go back to reference Baron-Cohen, S. 2010. Delusions of gender—'neurosexism', biology and politics. The Psychologist. 23(11): 904–905. Baron-Cohen, S. 2010. Delusions of gender—'neurosexism', biology and politics. The Psychologist. 23(11): 904–905.
73.
go back to reference Fine, C. 2010. Seductive arguments. The Psychologist 23(12): 948–949. Fine, C. 2010. Seductive arguments. The Psychologist 23(12): 948–949.
74.
go back to reference McCabe, D.P., and A.D. Castel. 2008. Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition 107(1): 343–352.CrossRef McCabe, D.P., and A.D. Castel. 2008. Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning. Cognition 107(1): 343–352.CrossRef
75.
go back to reference Weisberg, D.S., F.C. Keil, J. Goodstein, E. Rawson, and J.R. Gray. 2008. The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(3): 470–477.CrossRef Weisberg, D.S., F.C. Keil, J. Goodstein, E. Rawson, and J.R. Gray. 2008. The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20(3): 470–477.CrossRef
76.
go back to reference Racine, E., S. Waldman, J. Rosenberg, and J. Illes. 2010. Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Social Science & Medicine 71(4): 725–733.CrossRef Racine, E., S. Waldman, J. Rosenberg, and J. Illes. 2010. Contemporary neuroscience in the media. Social Science & Medicine 71(4): 725–733.CrossRef
78.
go back to reference Kimura, D. 2005. Hysteria trumps academic freedom. Vancouver Sun, p. A13. Kimura, D. 2005. Hysteria trumps academic freedom. Vancouver Sun, p. A13.
80.
go back to reference Tosh, J. 2010. The ‘extreme male brain’ theory of why men are better suited to IT: CyComp 2010 conference report. Psychology of Women Section Review 12(2): 29–32. Tosh, J. 2010. The ‘extreme male brain’ theory of why men are better suited to IT: CyComp 2010 conference report. Psychology of Women Section Review 12(2): 29–32.
81.
go back to reference Haslam, N., L. Rothschild, and D. Ernst. 2000. Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology 39(1): 113–127.CrossRef Haslam, N., L. Rothschild, and D. Ernst. 2000. Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology 39(1): 113–127.CrossRef
82.
go back to reference Dar-Nimrod, I., and S.J. Heine. 2006. Exposure to scientific theories affects women's math performance. Science 314: 435.CrossRef Dar-Nimrod, I., and S.J. Heine. 2006. Exposure to scientific theories affects women's math performance. Science 314: 435.CrossRef
83.
go back to reference Thoman, D.B., P.H. White, N. Yamawaki, and H. Koishi. 2008. Variations of gender-math stereotype content affect women's vulnerability to stereotype threat. Sex Roles 58(9/10): 702–712.CrossRef Thoman, D.B., P.H. White, N. Yamawaki, and H. Koishi. 2008. Variations of gender-math stereotype content affect women's vulnerability to stereotype threat. Sex Roles 58(9/10): 702–712.CrossRef
84.
go back to reference Dweck, C.S. 2007. Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence, ed. S.J. Ceci and W.M. Williams, 47–55. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.CrossRef Dweck, C.S. 2007. Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence, ed. S.J. Ceci and W.M. Williams, 47–55. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.CrossRef
85.
go back to reference Good, C., J. Aronson, and M. Inzlicht. 2003. Improving adolescents’ standardized test peformance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 24(6): 645–662.CrossRef Good, C., J. Aronson, and M. Inzlicht. 2003. Improving adolescents’ standardized test peformance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 24(6): 645–662.CrossRef
86.
go back to reference Brescoll, V., and M. LaFrance. 2004. The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science 15(8): 515–520.CrossRef Brescoll, V., and M. LaFrance. 2004. The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science 15(8): 515–520.CrossRef
87.
go back to reference Martin, C.L., and S. Parker. 1995. Folk theories about sex and race differences. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 21(1): 45–57.CrossRef Martin, C.L., and S. Parker. 1995. Folk theories about sex and race differences. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 21(1): 45–57.CrossRef
88.
go back to reference Coleman, J.M., and Y.-Y. Hong. 2008. Beyond nature and nurture: The influence of lay gender theories on self-stereotyping. Self and Identity 7(1): 34–53.CrossRef Coleman, J.M., and Y.-Y. Hong. 2008. Beyond nature and nurture: The influence of lay gender theories on self-stereotyping. Self and Identity 7(1): 34–53.CrossRef
89.
go back to reference Bastian, B., and N. Haslam. 2006. Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42(2): 228–235.CrossRef Bastian, B., and N. Haslam. 2006. Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42(2): 228–235.CrossRef
90.
go back to reference Brizendine, L. 2007. The female brain. London: Bantam Press. Brizendine, L. 2007. The female brain. London: Bantam Press.
91.
go back to reference Keller, J. 2005. In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 88(4): 686–702.CrossRef Keller, J. 2005. In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 88(4): 686–702.CrossRef
92.
go back to reference Dambrun, M., R. Kamiejski, N. Haddadi, and S. Duarte. 2009. Why does social dominance orientation decrease with university exposure to the social sciences? The impact of institutional socialization and the mediating role of “geneticism”. European Journal of Social Psychology 39(1): 88–100.CrossRef Dambrun, M., R. Kamiejski, N. Haddadi, and S. Duarte. 2009. Why does social dominance orientation decrease with university exposure to the social sciences? The impact of institutional socialization and the mediating role of “geneticism”. European Journal of Social Psychology 39(1): 88–100.CrossRef
93.
go back to reference Yzerbyt, V., S. Rocher, and G. Schadron. 1997. Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialist view of group perception. In The social psychology of stereotyping and group life, ed. R. Spears, P.J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, and S.A. Haslam, 20–50. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Yzerbyt, V., S. Rocher, and G. Schadron. 1997. Stereotypes as explanations: A subjective essentialist view of group perception. In The social psychology of stereotyping and group life, ed. R. Spears, P.J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, and S.A. Haslam, 20–50. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
94.
go back to reference Bem, S.L. 1993. The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press. Bem, S.L. 1993. The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven: Yale University Press.
95.
go back to reference Morton, T.A., S.A. Haslam, and M.J. Hornsey. 2009. Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 96(3): 653–664.CrossRef Morton, T.A., S.A. Haslam, and M.J. Hornsey. 2009. Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 96(3): 653–664.CrossRef
96.
go back to reference Haslam, N.. Genetic essentialism, neuro-essentialism, and stigma: Comment on Dar-Nimrod & Heine (2011). Psychological Bulletin. forthcoming. Haslam, N.. Genetic essentialism, neuro-essentialism, and stigma: Comment on Dar-Nimrod & Heine (2011). Psychological Bulletin. forthcoming.
97.
go back to reference Gurian, M., and B. Annis. 2008. Leadership and the sexes: Using gender science to create success in business. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gurian, M., and B. Annis. 2008. Leadership and the sexes: Using gender science to create success in business. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
98.
go back to reference Gurian, M, and K Stevens. 2004. With boys and girls in mind. Educational Leadership 62(3): 21–26. Gurian, M, and K Stevens. 2004. With boys and girls in mind. Educational Leadership 62(3): 21–26.
99.
go back to reference Sax, L. 2006. Why gender matters: What parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York: Broadway Books. Sax, L. 2006. Why gender matters: What parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York: Broadway Books.
100.
go back to reference Gaunt, R. 2006. Biological essentialism, gender ideologies, and role attitudes: What determines parents' involvement in child care. Sex Roles 55(7/8): 523–533.CrossRef Gaunt, R. 2006. Biological essentialism, gender ideologies, and role attitudes: What determines parents' involvement in child care. Sex Roles 55(7/8): 523–533.CrossRef
101.
go back to reference Fausto-Sterling, A. 1992. Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York: Basic Books. Fausto-Sterling, A. 1992. Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York: Basic Books.
102.
go back to reference Russett, C.E. 1989. Sexual science: the Victorian construction of womanhood. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Russett, C.E. 1989. Sexual science: the Victorian construction of womanhood. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
103.
go back to reference Shields, S. 1975. Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women. American Psychologist 30: 739–754.CrossRef Shields, S. 1975. Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women. American Psychologist 30: 739–754.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Explaining, or Sustaining, the Status Quo? The Potentially Self-Fulfilling Effects of ‘Hardwired’ Accounts of Sex Differences
Author
Cordelia Fine
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Neuroethics / Issue 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1874-5490
Electronic ISSN: 1874-5504
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-011-9118-4

Other articles of this Issue 3/2012

Neuroethics 3/2012 Go to the issue