Ellen Lenney

What's fine for the gander isn't always good for the goose: Sex differences in self-confidence as a function of ability area and comparison with others

Previous investigators have suggested that women display lower self-confidence than men across almost all achievement situations. The empirical validity of this suggestion is assessed in an experiment testing the following hypotheses: (1) Sex differences in self-confidence depend upon the particular ability area. (2) Womens self-confidence is more influenced than mens by characteristics of the particular individual with whom they compare themselves. Undergraduates completed verbal, interpersonal perceptiveness, spatial-mechanical, and creativity subtests. After each subtest, subjects estimated both their own score and that of the average undergraduate, the average male undergraduate, or the average female undergraduate. Self-confidence was operationally defined in terms of how favorably subjects compared their work to that of their peers. As predicted, womens self-confidence was lower than mens in only the spatial-mechanical and creativity subtests; and for women, but not for men, self-confidence depended upon which peer was specified. It is concluded that situation variables do determine sex differences in self-confidence and that womens self-confidence may be unduly affected by situation-specific comparison cues.

Androgyny: Some Audacious Assertions toward Its Coming of Age.

It is proposed that the field of research on psychological androgyny has entered a crucial period during which its development will not be optimal unless the following problems are recognized and corrected for: (a) the dangers of too rigidly held values; (b) the prevalence of dubious definitional assumptions; (c) the pervasity of diffuse and/or atheoretical research directions; and (d) alienation from certain basic concerns in “mainstream” personality research. The origins and nature of each of these problems are discussed, and in each case recommendations for future research are made. Finally, broad outlines are proposed for an idiographic model of sex roles designed to increase the predictive utility of assessment in the area of androgyny research.

The Effect of Clear Evaluation Criteria on Sex Bias in Judgments of Performance

Previous research indicates that the work of women is often devalued relative to that of men. Two experiments tested the hypothesis that such sex bias appears when judges follow ambiguous guidelines or criteria in making evaluations, but not when they follow clear evaluation guidelines. In each experiment, male and female undergraduates evaluated a performance that was attributed to either a man or woman (an intellectual test performance in Experiment I; an artistic craft object in Experiment II). Subjects followed either clear, explicit evaluation criteria or vague, ambiguous criteria. As predicted, female subjects evaluated the “females” performance less favorably than the “males” only when” criteria were vague. In contrast, male subjects showed little evidence of sex bias, regardless of the criteria they followed. Discussion centers upon: (1) possible cognitive processes underlying the observed effects of clear criteria; and (2) potential practical applications designed to alleviate sex bias in naturalistic settings.

Concluding comments on androgyny: Some intimations of its mature development

Major problems and ideas raised by the articles in this special issue are discussed, with an emphasis upon their implications for the productive development of androgyny research. First, the various methods of scoring a given sex-role inventory differ in their definitions of androgyny and in their underlying models of the relationships among masculinity, femininity, and other variables. Accordingly, recommendations for the judicious use of scoring methods are made. Second, adjustment differences between androgynous and sex-typed individuals are discussed, and researchers are urged to determine the specific aspects of sex roles which may be dysfunctional in particular settings. Third, attention is drawn to new methodologies and new content areas for androgyny research. Finally, the implications of the historical and cultural “location” of this research area for its status as a scientific enterprise are discussed.