The Psychology of Gender 4th Edition

Sex-Related Comparisons: Theory 171

the person does not think of the world in

sex-related terms, yet androgyny is defined

in terms of gender-related traits. Bem (1981)

acknowledges that this measure of androg-

yny may not imply the flexibility in behavior

she had hoped. Androgyny can be restric-

tive in the sense that the person has two ide-

als to meet: a masculine one and a feminine

one. Androgyny also does not rid society of

the two culturally defined gender categories,

which was Bem’s ultimate aim. Bem really ad-

vocated gender aschematicity, not androgyny.

terms of gender and more likely to organize

groups of others in terms of gender compared

to androgynous persons. Bem also found sup-

port for her theory by demonstrating that

sex-typed individuals prefer to engage in be-

havior consistent with their gender role and

feel more uncomfortable performing gender-

role-inconsistent behavior.

One difficulty with gender schema

theory is its relation to androgyny. The an-

drogynous person is supposed to be gender

aschematic. Being gender aschematic implies

FIGURE 5.11 Sex-typed individuals more quickly endorse information con-

sistent with their gender-role schemas than cross-sex-typed, androgynous, or

undifferentiated individuals. Sex-typed individuals are slower to endorse infor-

mation inconsistent with their gender-role schemas than the other three groups

of individuals.

Source: Bem (1981).

.40

.30

.20

.10

0

–.10

–.20

–.30

Schema-Consistent

Judgments

Schema-Inconsistent

Judgments

Sex-Typed

Cross-Sex-Typed

Androgynous

Undifferentiated

Sex-Typed

Cross-Sex-Typed

Androgynous

Undifferentiated

Latency Difference in Seconds betweenSchema-Relevant and Neutral Judgments

(Positive Scores Signify Faster Schema-Relevant Judgments)

M05_HELG0185_04_SE_C05.indd 171 6/21/11 8:03 AM