Men and women are from Earth: Examining the latent structure of gender.

Abstract

Taxometric methods enable determination of whether the latent structure of a construct is dimensional or taxonic (nonarbitrary categories). Although sex as a biological category is taxonic, psychological gender differences have not been examined in this way. The taxometric methods of mean above minus below a cut, maximum eigenvalue, and latent mode were used to investigate whether gender is taxonic or dimensional. Behavioral measures of stereotyped hobbies and physiological characteristics (physical strength, anthropometric measurements) were examined for validation purposes, and were taxonic by sex. Psychological indicators included sexuality and mating (sexual attitudes and behaviors, mate selectivity, sociosexual orientation), interpersonal orientation (empathy, relational-interdependent self-construal), gender-related dispositions (masculinity, femininity, care orientation, unmitigated communion, fear of success, science inclination, Big Five personality), and intimacy (intimacy prototypes and stages, social provisions, intimacy with best friend). Constructs were with few exceptions dimensional, speaking to Spence's (1993) gender identity theory. Average differences between men and women are not under dispute, but the dimensionality of gender indicates that these differences are inappropriate for diagnosing gender-typical psychological variables on the basis of sex.

Adaptation and Factorial Validation of the Attitudes Toward Gender Roles Scale

“…In fact, as several studies have reported, the changes in representations of gender roles are more noticeable in the public domain, for example, in paid employment, than in the private domain, where the division of household chores and childcare still grants the feminine gender role a special emphasis on homemaking (Andrade & Bould, 2012;Andrade & Fontaine, 2007;Carothers & Reis, 2012;Cech & Blair-Loy, 2010;Matias et al, 2012;Oliveira, Fischer, Teixeira, Sá, & Gomes, 2010). As stated by Amâncio (1994), "the enlargement of gender roles in the social context does not entail that a change in one of the domains, in this case the public domain, necessarily implies a generalized change on the behavioral level or on the subjective level" (p. 72).…”

When the Difference is in the Details: A Critique of “Stepping out of the Caveman's Shadow: Nations' Gender Gap Predicts Degree of Sex Differentiation in Mate Preferences”

“…It is unfortunate this misconceptualization still exists. It is likely the result of an implicit dualism stemming from Descartes in which dichotomous, and not interactive, thinking dominates our conceptions of nature and nurture, particularly with regard to sex differences (Carothers and Reis, 2012).…”

Beyond sex differences: new approaches for thinking about variation in brain structure and function

“…Psychological and social variables that correlate with sex category should not, however, be integrated into a single measure of gender, because gender is a complex, multilayered system [3,77,78], with psychological, behavioural and social components, each of which is multidimensional and cannot be reduced to a single variable (e.g. [3,[77][78][79][80][81]). …”