Psychology - Issues and Debates

Universality

any underlying characteristics of human beings that is capable of being applied to all, despite differences of experiences and upbringing. Gender bias and culture bias threaten the universality of findings in psychology

gender bias

psychological research or theory may offer a view that does not justifiably represent the experience and behaviour of men or women (usually women)

androcentrism

male-centred; when ‘normal’ behaviour is judged according to a male standard (meaning that female behaviour is often judged to be ‘abnormal’ by comparison)

alpha bias

psychological research is that which exaggerates or overestimates differences between the sexes

beta bias

theories that ignore or minimise differences between the sexes

Gender Bias - Alpha bias

Alpha bias within psychological research is that which exaggerates or overestimates differences between the sexes. Such differences are typically presented as real and enduring; fixed and inevitable. Although these differences may occasionally heighten the value of women, they are more likely to devalue females in relation to their male counterparts.

An example of alpha bias is the sociobiological theory of relationship formation (for example Wilson 1975), which explains human sexual attraction and behvaiour through the principle of ‘survival efficiency’. It is in the male’s interest to try to impregnate as many women as possible to increase the chances of his genes being passed on to the next generation. For the female, the best chance of preserving her genes is to ensure the healthy survival of the relatively few offspring she is able to produce in her lifetime. The central premise of sociobiological theory is that sexual promiscuity in males is genetically determined whilst females who engage in the same behaviour are regarded as going against their ‘nature’ - an exaggeration of the difference between sexes (alpha bias). This is also an example of essentialist argument in psychology.

Gender Bias - Beta bias

In contrast, beta bias ignores, minimises or underestimates differences between men and women. This often occurs when female participants are not included as part of the research process and then it is assumed that research findings apply equally to both sexes. An example of beta bias is the fight or flight response, early research into fight or flight was based exclusively on male animals (preferred for research because female hormones fluctuate) and was assumed to be universal response to a threatening situation. More recently, Shelley Taylore et al (2000) have suggested that female biology has evolved to inhibit the figh or flight response, shifting attention towards caring for offspring (tending) and forming defensive networks with other females (befriending).

Androcentrism

One possible consequence of beta bias is androcentrism. If our understanding of what counts as ‘normal’ behaviour is being drawn from research that involves all-male samples, then any behaviour that deviates from this standard is likely to be judged as ‘abnormal’, ‘inferior’ or ‘deficient’ by comparison. At best, this leads to female behaviour being misunderstood, and at worst, pathologised - that it is taken as a sign of psychological instability or disorder.

For example, many feminist commentators have objected to the diagnostic category pre-menstrual syndrome (PMS) on the grounds that it stereotypes and trivialises female experience. Critics claim that PMS is a social construction which medicalises female emotions, especially anger, by explaining these in hormonal terms. Male anger, on the other hand, is often seen as a rational response to external pressures. (Brescoll and Uhman, 2008)

evaluation points for gender bias

implications of gender bias, sexism within the research process, reflexivity, essentialism and feminist psychology

implications of gender bias (evaluation of gender bias)

Gender-biased research may create misleading assumptions about female behaviour, fail to challenge negative stereotypes and validate discriminatory practices. It may provide a scientific ‘justification’ to deny women opportunities within the workplace or in wider society. In any domain in which men set the standard of normalcy, as Carol Tavris (1993) puts it, ‘it becomes normal for women to feel abnormal’.

Thus, gender bias in research is not just a methodological problem but may have damaging consequences which affect the lives and prospects of real women (for instance, the statistic that females are around twice as likely to be diagnosed with depression than men)

sexism within the research process (evaluation of gender bias)

A lack of women appointed at senior research level means that female concerns may not be reflected in the research questions asked. Male researchers are more likely to have their work published and studies which find evidence of gender differences are more likely to appear in journal articles than those that do not. Also, the laboratory experiment may further disadvantage women. Female participants are placed in an inequitable relationship with a (usually male) researcher who has the power to label them as unreasonable, irrational and unable to complete complex tasks (Nicolson, 1995).

This means that psychology may be guilty of supporting a form of institutional sexism that creates bias in theory and research (Denmark et al, 1988)

reflexivity (evaluation of gender bias)

Many modern research are beginning to recognise the effect their own values and assumptions have on the nature of their work. Rather than seeing such bias as a problem that may threaten the objective status of their work, they embrace it as a crucial and critical aspect of the research process in general. For instance, in their study of the lack of women in executive positions in accountancy firms, Claire Dambrin and Caroline Lambert (2008) include reflection on how their gender-related experiences influence their reading of events.

Such relfecivity is an important development in psychology and may lead to greater awareness of the role of personal biases in shaping research in the future.

essentialism (evaluation for gender bias)

Many of the gender differences reported by psychologists over the years are based on an essentialist perspective: that then gender difference in question is inevitable (essential) and ‘fixed’ in nature. Valerie Walkerdine (1990) reports how, in the 1930’s, ‘scientific’ research revealed how intellectual activity - such as attending university - would shrivel a woman’s ovaries and harm her chances of giving birth. Such essentialist accounts in psychology are often politically motivated arguments disguised as biological ‘facts’. This often creates a ‘double-standard’ in the way that the same behaviour is viewed from a male and female perspective.