Perspectives on Psychological Science 2

Perspectives on Psychological
Science
http://pps.sagepub.com/

The Nature−Nurture Debates: 25 Years of Challenges in Understanding the Psychology of Gender
Alice H. Eagly and Wendy Wood
Perspectives on Psychological Science 2013 8: 340
DOI: 10.1177/1745691613484767 The online version of this article can be found at: http://pps.sagepub.com/content/8/3/340 http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of:

Association For Psychological Science

Additional services and information for Perspectives on Psychological Science can be found at: Email Alerts: http://pps.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://pps.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
484767research-article2013 PPSXXX10.1177/1745691613484767Eagly, WoodThe Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years of Challenges
Perspectives on Psychological Science
The Nature–Nurture Debates: 25 Years 8(3) 340 –357
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions: of Challenges in Understanding the sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1745691613484767
Psychology of Gender pps.sagepub.com

Alice H. Eagly1 and Wendy Wood2
1Northwestern University and 2University of Southern California
Abstract
Nature–nurture debates continue to be highly contentious in the psychology of gender despite the common recognition that both types of causal explanations are important. In this article, we provide a historical analysis of the vicissitudes of nature and nurture explanations of sex differences and similarities during the quarter century since the founding of the Association for Psychological Science. We consider how the increasing use of meta-analysis helped to clarify sex difference findings if not the causal explanations for these effects. To illustrate these developments, this article describes socialization and preferences for mates as two important areas of gender research. We also highlight

References: Abelson, R. P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129–133. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.1.129 Alexander, M Allison, C. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2013). Early menarche: Confluence of biological and contextual factors. Sex Roles, 68, 55–64. American Psychological Association. (2013). Thesaurus of psychological index terms. Retrieved from http://psycnet.apa. org/index.cfm?fa=termfinder.displayTerms&id=082EA93B- 9DE8-AA40-8271-8250B456440A Anderson, K. J., & Leaper, C. (1998). Meta-analyses of gender effects on conversational interruption: Who, what, when, where, and how. Sex Roles, 39, 225–252. doi:10.1023/ A:1018802521676 Bandura, A Banerjee, R., & Lintern, V. (2000). Boys will be boys: The effect of social evaluation concerns on gender-typing. Social Development, 9, 397–408. doi:10.1111/1467-9507.00133 Becker, S Bell, R. Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies of socialization. Psychological Review, 75, 81–95. doi:10.1037/h0025583 Bem, S Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354 Berenbaum, S Berenbaum, S. A., Blakemore, J. E. O., & Beltz, A. M. (2011). A role for biology in gender-related behavior. Sex Roles, 64, 804–825 Biernat, M. (2003). Toward a broader view of social stereotyping. American Psychologist, 58, 1019–1027 Bleier, R. (1991). Gender ideology and the brain: Sex differences research. In M. T. Notman & C. C. Nadelson (Eds.), Issues in psychiatry: Women and men: New perspectives on gender differences (pp. 63–73). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association. Booth, A., Granger, D. A., Mazur, A., & Kivlighan, K. T. (2006). Testosterone and social behavior Brescoll, V., & LaFrance, M. (2004). The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science, 15, 515–520 Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 1, 6th ed., pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49 Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1992). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing gender development. Child Development, 63, 1236–1250. doi:10.2307/1131530 Byrnes, J Campbell, A. (2012). The study of sex differences: Feminism and biology. Zeitschrift für Psychologie [Journal of Psychology], 220, 137–143. doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000105 Carothers, B Cooper, H. M. (1979). Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher expectation communication and performance influence. Review of Educational Research, 49, 389–410. Courvoisier, D. S., Renaud, R., Geiser, C., Paschke, K., Gaudy, K., & Jordan, K. (2013). Sex hormones and mental rotation: An intensive longitudinal investigation. Hormones and Behavior, 63, 345–351. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.12.007 Cowan, P Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Sex, evolution and behavior (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex (1st ed.). London, England: John Murray. Davatzikos, C., & Resnick, S. M. (1998). Sex differences in anatomic measures of interhemispheric connectivity: Correlations with cognition in women but not men. Cerebral Cortex, 8, 635–640. doi:10.1093/cercor/8.7.635 Deaux, K Eagly, A. H. (1983). Gender and social influence: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 38, 971–981. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.38.9.971 Eagly, A Eagly, A. H. (2012). Science, feminism, and the psychology of investigating gender. In R. W. Proctor & E. J. Capaldi (Eds.), Psychology of science: Implicit and explicit reasoning (pp. 267–288). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (1981). Sex of researchers and sextyped communications as determinants of sex differences in influenceability: A meta-analysis of social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 1–20. doi:10.1037/0033- 2909.90.1.1 Eagly, A. H., & Crowley, M. (1986). Gender and helping behavior: A meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 283–308. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.100.3.283 Eagly, A. H., Eastwick, P. W., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. (2009). Possible selves in marital roles: The impact of the anticipated division of labor on the mate preferences of women and men Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research. American Psychologist, 67, 211–230. doi:10.1037/ a0027260 Eagly, A Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423 Ellis, B. J. (2004). Timing of pubertal maturation in girls: An integrated life history approach. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 920–958. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.920 Else-Quest, N Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Crossnational patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103–127. doi:10.1037/a0018053 England, P., & Bearak, J Estes, Z., & Felker, S. (2012). Confidence mediates the sex difference in mental rotation performance. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 4, 557–570 Feingold, A. (1990). Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 981–993. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514.59.5.981 Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125–139 Fine, D. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference. New York, NY: Norton. Finkel, E. J., & Eastwick, P. W. (2009). Arbitrary social norms influence sex differences in romantic selectivity. Psychological Science, 20, 1290–1295 Freud, S. (1927). Some psychological consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 8, 133–142. Galton, F. (1907). Inquiries into the human faculty and its development. London, England: Dent. Gangestad, S. W., Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2006). Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: Evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 75–95. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1702_1 Gettler, L Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109 Hall, J. A. (1978). Gender effects in decoding nonverbal cues. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 845–857. Hankin, B. L., & Abramson, L. Y. (2001). Development of gender differences in depression: An elaborated cognitive vulnerability–transactional stress theory. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 773–796. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.6.773