Mothers’ Identities and Gender Socialization of Daughters

Overview of Research on Maternal Identity and Gender Socialization

• Primary Objective: The study, conducted by Christine E. Rittenour, Colleen Warner Colaner, and Kelly Geier Odenweller, examined how 125 mothers' identities and communication styles influence the gender socialization of their daughters.

• Core Aims:     * Aim 1: To address potential identity-based impetuses for rigidity in gender socialization by integrating Gender Schema Theory (GST) with identity-based theories that prioritize morality.     * Aim 2: To explore mothers' recalled messages regarding the familiar identities of motherhood and feminism to illuminate their voiced beliefs, goals, and values for their daughters and women at large.

• Key Findings Summary: Mothers' generativity identity was the most significant predictor of socialization. High generativity was associated with encouraging both stereotypically female and male behaviors and a lower likelihood of discouraging other-gender characteristics.

Theoretical Frameworks

• Social Learning Theory (SLT): Based on Bandura (1969, 1971), children enact social behaviors by mimicking their social worlds. Parents act as potent models and reinforcers through rewards and punishments.

• Gender Schema Theory (GST): Based on Marks, Lam, and McHale (2009), mothers are identified as the primary drafters of daughters' gender schemas because they are the same-sex parent. GST posits that rules established through SLT create schemas (guidelines) for gendered behavior, often leading to the impression that sex differences are innate.

• Identity Theory: Reference is made to Stets and Burke (2000) and Stets and Carter (2006). This study focuses on how identity serves as the internal structure directing beliefs and behaviors, specifically looking at the intersection of role-based and morality-based identities.

Dimensions of Gender Socialization

The study utilizes Blakemore and Hill’s (2008) conceptual model across five realms of parent-child communication:

• Encouragement of toys and activities stereotyped for boys: Encouraging involvement in masculine tasks (e.g., playing with toy trucks, tools, cars).

• Encouragement of toys and activities stereotyped for girls: Encouraging feminine behavior (e.g., playing with dolls, jewelry, kitchen toys).

• Disapproval of other-gender characteristics: Actively discouraging behaviors inconsistent with biological sex (e.g., discouraging a daughter from being a ‘tomboy’).

• Encouragement of helping at home: The expectation for children to perform housework (e.g., cleaning, laundry, dinner prep).

• Encouragement of education and marriage for family: Messages prioritizing future family and child-rearing roles over careers.

Maternal Identities Analyzed

• Mothering Identity: Assessed as the role women cite most frequently as central to their personal identities. Previous research suggests higher mothering identity leads to increased support, sacrifice, and responsibility.

• Feminist Identity: Defined by a commitment to eradicating inequalities based on sex and gender, and promoting equality, fairness, and inclusivity. High identification with feminist values predicts nonsexist parenting and proactive questioning of society.

• Generativity Identity: Defined by Erikson (1963) as altruism toward the next generation or a conscious concern for others. It is the ‘pinnacle of human identity development.’ Highly generative individuals act as role models and altruistic parents.

Methodology and Participant Statistics

• Participants: $N = 125$ mothers of living daughters.

• Daughter Demographics: Mothers reported on a daughter aged at least 18 (range: $18$ to $25$; $M = 19.8$).

• Mother Demographics: Age range of $31$ to $54$ ($M = 44$, $SD = 7.6$). Average number of children: $2.61$ ($SD = 0.96$, range: $1$ to $6$).

• Ethnicity Breakdown:     * Caucasian: $89.1\%$ ($n = 114$)     * Asian: $3.1\%$ ($n = 4$)     * Native American: $2.3\%$ ($n = 3$)     * Hispanic/Latino/a: $2.3\%$ ($n = 3$)     * Black/African American: $0.8\%$ ($n = 1$)     * Not identified: $2.3\%$ ($n = 3$)

• Recruitment: Online chatrooms, parenting forums, work-life balance forums, and undergraduate classrooms at a large Midwest university.

Measurement Scales and Reliability

• Mothering Identity Scale: Assessed via a 3-item measure (Johnson et al., 1999). Scores: $M = 6.59$, $SD = 0.87$, $\alpha = .84$.

• Feminist Identity Scale: Measured via the passive acceptance subscale (Downing & Roush, 1985). Items reversed to measure adherence to feminist ideals. Scores: $M = 3.70$, $SD = 0.93$, $\alpha = .80$.

• Loyola Generativity Scale: 20-item measure of generative concern/behavior. Scores: $M = 5.35$, $SD = 0.77$, $\alpha = .87$.

• Child Socialization Scale (Blakemore & Hill, 2008):     * Disapproval of Other-Gender Characteristics: $\alpha = .66$, $M = 1.96$, $SD = 1.18$.     * Toys/Activities - Boy Stereotyped: $\alpha = .83$, $M = 4.46$, $SD = 1.01$.     * Toys/Activities - Girl Stereotyped: $\alpha = .93$, $M = 5.36$, $SD = 1.14$.     * Helping at Home: $\alpha = .92$, $M = 5.14$, $SD = 1.30$.     * Education for Marriage and Family: $\alpha = .74$, $M = 4.86$, $SD = 1.15$.

Statistical Results and Hypotheses

• H1 (Feminist Identity and Socialization): Partially supported. Feminist identity was:     * Positively associated with encouragement of activities/toys stereotyped for boys ($r = .22$, p < .05).     * Negatively associated with education for marriage/family ($r = -.18$, p < .05).     * Negatively associated with disapproval of other-gender characteristics ($r = -.33$, p < .01).

• RQ1 (Mothering Identity): Small association with socializing daughters toward girl-stereotyped toys ($r = .22$, p < .05).

• RQ2 (Generativity Identity): Positively associated with encouragement of both boy-stereotyped toys ($r = .22$) and girl-stereotyped toys ($r = .23$), and helping at home ($r = .31$) (all p < .01 or p < .05).

• Model Statistics (Table 2):     * Disapproval of characteristics model: $R^2 = .13$, $F(3, 119) = 6.05$, $p = .001$. Significant negative predictor: Feminist identity ($\beta = -.32$, p < .01).     * Boy toys model: $R^2 = .13$, $F(3, 119) = 5.65$, $p = .001$. Significant predictors: Mothering ID ($\beta = .17$), Feminist ID ($\beta = .21$), Generativity ID ($\beta = .20$) (all p < .05).     * Girl toys model: $R^2 = .11$, $F(3, 119) = 4.67$, $p = .004$. Significant predictors: Mothering ID ($\beta = .22$) and Generativity ID ($\beta = .23$) (both p < .05).

Qualitative Findings: Recall of Messages about Motherhood

Mothers recalled themes categorized through inductive coding (Initial reliability $\kappa$ provided):

• Power of Motherhood ($n = 41$): Includes valence-based subcategories:     * Positive Power: Rewarding ($n = 24$), Top Priority ($n = 10$), A Calling ($n = 5$), Life-altering ($n = 2$).     * Negative Power ($n = 24$): Discusses hardships, stress, regret, and frustrations.     * Neutral Power ($n = 7$): Messages without a specific valence.

• Becoming a Mother ($n = 30$): Discussion of timing or absence of motherhood.     * Daughter’s Choice ($n = 13$): Reporting the decision belongs to the daughter.     * Desire for daughter to wait ($n = 14$): Instructing daughter to reach maturity first.     * Grandparent desire ($n = 3$): Expressing a wish for grandchildren.

• Doing Mothering ($n = 20$): Prescriptions on proper traits (selflessness/kindness).

• Partner/Spouse ($n = 13$): Discussions involving current or future partners.

• Mother-Daughter Relationship ($n = 12$): Contextualizing the roles within their own bond.

• Daughter’s Aptitude ($n = 11$): Referencing qualities making the daughter a good future mother.

• Professional/Personal Balance ($n = 10$): Motherhood alongside work or personal identity.

Qualitative Findings: Recall of Messages about Feminism

• Confidence and Guidance ($n = 53$): Messages about a daughter’s independence, strength, and self-acceptance serving her future success.

• Education ($n = 35$): Definitions of feminism, women's movements, and historical status changes.

• No Discussion ($n = 29$): Explicit statements that feminism was not discussed.

• Achieved Equality ($n = 27$): Asserting that today’s society is already gender equal; gender inequality is described as a ‘myth’.

• Expressed Disapproval of Feminism ($n = 8$): Refuting the feminist movement or label.

• Partner/Spouse ($n = 7$): Cautionary messages about inequalities in romantic relationships.

• Modelling ($n = 7$): Leading through being independent and strong.

• Nonsexist Parenting ($n = 3$): Direct references to raising children without gender bias.

Discussion and Practical Implications

• Identity and Communication: Communication acts as both a mirror and a mechanism for identity. The study suggests mothers use gender socialization to manifest their internal moral priorities.

• Generativity's Role: Generative mothers encourage a broad array of experiences for their children, prioritizing helpfulness and personal preference over strict gender traditionalism.

• Feminism as a Positive Influence: Higher commitment to feminist ideals prevents aversive gender-typing which is linked to diminished performance in math/science and lower career aspirations for girls.

• Limitations: High mothering identity scores showed little variability, potentially due to social desirability or self-selection of participants from ‘family-oriented’ websites. The scope was limited to maternal perspectives; future research should include fathers and daughters' views.