Early Childhood Education Journal, Vol. 34, No. 5, April 2007 (Ó 2007) DOI: 10.1007/s10643-006-0123-x
Preschoolers’ Perceptions of Gender Appropriate Toys and their Parents’ Beliefs About Genderized Behaviors: Miscommunication, Mixed Messages, or Hidden Truths? Nancy K. Freeman1,2
Young children construct understandings of gender during the preschool years. They accurately apply common gender stereotypes to toys by the time they are three and readily predict their parents’ opinions about gender-typical and cross-gender play. This study involved 3- and 5-year-old children in identifying ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’. It also asked them to predict their parents’ reactions to their choices of gender-specific toys. These children’s parents were surveyed in an effort to describe their preferences about gender-specific toys and behaviors. Responses indicated that, in spite of evidence that many of these parents reject common gender stereotypes, their children predicted parents would consistently apply these stereotypes as reflected by their approval or disapproval of children’s choices to play with gender stereotyped or cross-gender toys. The mis-match between parents’ self-described beliefs and children’s perceptions of the messages they have received about genderized play are discussed. KEY WORDS: Gender; parental attitudes; gender development; gender stereotypes; gender-specific; cross-gender; gender socialization; early childhood; preschool; young children; preschoolers; toys; play; play preferences; Title IX; sex roles.
Top Gun Bullet Troublemaker Rage
stereotypes, they report that consumers buy gender specific models, even when they have less stereotyped options from which to choose. Bikes with names like ‘‘Dreamweaver’’ and ‘‘Top Gun’’ are, perennially, their best sellers (Daniel, 1999). It may be surprising that gender stereotypes persist more than a generation after the 1972 passage of the Title IX of the Education Amendments designed to eliminate sex discrimination in programs serving girls and boys. Market research shows, however, that genderized marketing is more pervasive than ever (Russell & Tyler, 2002). Just a few years ago Mattel sold pink flowered Barbie and blue Hot Wheels PC’s described as being ‘‘Designed Just for Boys’’. Many products, from sheets and towels to adhesive bandages, snack foods, and school supplies, reflect popular gender stereotypes. This trend is reinforced by websites for children’s furniture,
Miss Daisy Wildflower Dreamweaver Tickled Pink
INTRODUCTION These are the names of popular models of children’s bikes. There can be no doubt which are meant for girls and which are for boys. And, although manufacturers have been criticized for perpetuating 1
Instruction and Teacher Education, University of South Carolina, Room 225, 1530 Wheat Street, Columbia, SC 29201, USA. 2 Correspondence should be directed to Nancy K. Freeman, Instruction and Teacher Education, University of South Carolina, Room 225, 1530 Wheat Street, Columbia, SC 29201, USA; e-mail:
[email protected]
357 1082-3301/07/0400-0357/0 Ó 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
358 furnishings and toys that prominently feature links to products ‘‘for boys’’ and ‘‘for girls’’.3 Young Children’s Construction of Gender Children construct their understandings of gender at an early age. By about 24 months they begin to define themselves as ‘‘girls’’ or ‘‘boys’’ (Kohlberg, 1966; Kohlberg & Ullian, 1974; Sandnabba & Ahlberg, 1999). And they are apt to have rigid definitions of how girls and boys should behave by the age of five (Martin & Ruble, 2004). The acquisition of these gender stereotypes demonstrates that children are very effective students of culture. They quickly learn to categorize ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’ in socially acceptable ways and to behave as they think they ‘‘should’’ (Raag & Rackliff, 1998; Powlishta, Serbin, & Moller, 1993). Preschoolers have been shown, for example, to reliably apply gender stereotypes when responding to questions about how their parents, teachers or babysitters, peers, and siblings would want them to play. Girls know they are expected to play with dish sets and baby dolls and boys know tools, trucks, and cars are for them (Raag & Rackliff, 1998). The authors of some studies have noted that society’s definition of what is feminine has expanded since the launch of the women’s movement in the early 1970s, but the definition of masculinity has not been similarly revised (Fagot & Littman, 1975). This line of inquiry has documented that while the current generation of girls is more likely to be encouraged to do things that were once considered masculine than were their mothers, the past 20 years has seen both children and adults narrow their definitions of appropriate behavior for boys (Burge, 1981; Cahill & Adams, 1997; Fisher-Thompson, 1990; Martin, 1990; Moulton & Adams-Price, 1997; Turner & Gervai, 1995). How are Children’s Cross-Gender Behaviors Perceived? Researchers who describe adults’ and children’s typical responses to cross-gender play consistently report that boys who engage in ‘‘girls’ games’’ are more likely to be criticized by parents, teachers and peers than are girls who enjoy activities and materials 3
Examples of websites with prominent sections organized by gender include toy stores and manufacturers www.toysrus.com, http:// www.mattel.com, and furniture/ furnishing vendors such as http:// potterybarnkids.com/
Freeman labeled as ‘‘for boys’’ (Cahill & Adams, 1997; Martin, 1990; Martin, 1995; Martin, Wood, & Little, 1990). These results have been interpreted as evidence that adults share concerns that boys who exhibit crossgender behaviors will become increasingly feminine, but believe that girls will outgrow their ‘‘tomboyishness’’ and will become as feminine as their ‘‘typical’’ female peers (Sandnabba & Ahlberg, 1999). It has been documented, moreover, that fathers often more rigidly impose sex role expectations on their sons than on their daughters, and that they are less flexible in their definitions of gender appropriate behaviors than are boys’ mothers (Burge, 1981). Description of the Study This article describes a small scale preliminary investigation of how children’s applications of gender stereotypes align with stereotypical cultural expectations and reports their parents’ self-described attitudes and beliefs. It grew out of the author’s observation that, in spite of the fact that the goal of Title IX to assure gender equity has become generally accepted in contemporary American society, gender stereotypes persist (Frawley, 2005). Boys and girls continue to face differentiated adult expectations which limit opportunities for both girls and boys (Sadker & Sadker, 1994). The purpose of this study is to consider how young children’s perceptions of their parents’ approval for stereotypical and cross-gender play compare with these adults’ self-reported beliefs and preferences. Research Questions This article reports the results of interviews asking preschoolers to categorize ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’. It also describes these children’s responses to questions about which toys they think their parents would want them to play with; includes their parents’ responses to questions about genderrelated behaviors, characteristics and materials; and finally considers inconsistencies and mismatches between these parents’ self-reported attitudes about genderized behaviors and these young children’s perceptions of their parents’ preferences. These questions guided the investigation: 1. What toys do these 3- and 5-year-old children identify as ‘‘girl’’ toys, and which as ‘‘boy’’ toys? 2. Which of these toys do they think their parents would approve of their playing with? 3. How do these parents describe their own attitudes and beliefs about stereotypically feminine or masculine toys, behaviors, and activities?
PreschoolersÕ Perceptions of Gender
359
METHOD Sample This research was conducted in the classrooms of 3-year-olds (3.1–4.1 years of age) (N = 13) and 5-year-olds (5.1–5.11 years of age) (N = 13) Table I at the laboratory school on the campus of a major research institution in a mid-sized southeastern city. These classrooms reflected the cultural and economic diversity that characterized the enrollment in this fullday, year-round childcare program.
toys. Their responses to the questions ‘‘Which toys would your mother want you to play with? Which toys would your father want you to play with?’’ were recorded. Parents who had given consent for their children to participate in the study were asked to complete a Child-Rearing Sex-Role Attitude Scale (APPENDIX) (adapted from Burge, 1981). This 19-item 5-point Likert questionnaire was designed to describe adults’ attitudes and beliefs about gender related toys, activities, and behaviors. RESULTS
Procedures Children whose parents consented were interviewed individually twice by a trained research assistant. Interviews were based on a protocol developed by Raag and Rackliff (1998). The purpose of these interviews was to gain insights into: 1. Whether these children had internalized common gender stereotypes by asking, ‘‘Is this. . . [toy that I am holding up] . . . a good gift for a girl or a boy?’’ 2. These children’s perceptions of their parents’ attitudes about the appropriateness of gender-specific toy choices by asking, ‘‘Which toys would your mother want you to play with?’’ and ‘‘Which toys would your father want you to play with?’’
During the first interview each child was shown pictures of children who appeared to share their ethnicity and to be about their age. They were asked to ‘‘help me decide which toys would be a good choice because I need to choose a gift for this boy and this girl’’. They were then given the toys, one at a time, and asked to make one pile for the girl and another for the boy. Toys were ones that fit into Raag and Rackliff’s (1998) definitions of ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’. This interview protocol required a forced choice. On another date, from one week to one month later, children were presented the same collection of
Due to the small sample size of this preliminary investigation only frequencies and percentages are reported below. The limitations created by the small number of participants makes further statistical analysis inappropriate. Three-Year-Olds When 3-year-olds separated ‘‘girl toys’’ from ‘‘boy toys’’ 92% of their responses reflected gendertypical stereotypes. Interestingly, not only did these 3-year-old girls identify toys as ‘‘for girls’’ or ‘‘for boys’’ along slightly more stereotypical lines than did the boys, but they were also unanimous in their opinion that parents would approve if they were to play with ‘‘girl toys’’. Both girls and boys predicted that their opposite-sex parent would be more supportive of cross-gender choices. (See Figures 1–4). Five-Year-Olds There were several indications that these 5-yearolds applied gender stereotypes more rigidly than had their 3-year-old schoolmates. Both girls and boys sorted toys more stereotypically than had the 3-yearolds. Boys’ responses indicated that they felt the effects of more narrowly defined gender stereotypes
Table I. Summary of Data from Interviews with Children Predicted Approval for Gender Stereotyped Choices from Sorts Toys Following Gender Stereotypes +3-year-old boys (n = 5) 3-year-old girls (n = 8) 5-year-old boys (n = 7) 5-year-old girls (n = 6)
90% 93% 97% 98%
Predicted Approval for Cross-Gender Choices from
Mother
Father
Mother
Father
72% 100% 88% 100%
68% 100% 94% 100%
36% 28% 20% 20%
20% 40% 9% 33%
360
Freeman 8
5
7
Boy Toy?
3
Dad Yes? 2
Mom Yes?
1
# of Responses
# of Responses
4
6 5
Boy Toy?
4
Dad Yes?
3
Mom Yes?
2 1
6
# of Responses
5 4
Girl Toy? Dad Yes?
3
Mom Yes?
it C oa t Su
C oa t y m
Ar
cl e
Ba
se ba ll/ M
ot oc y M
Sk
at eb oa r
d
Su it C oa t
y
Co at
M itt Ar m
Ba s
eb al l/
cl
e
d
M ot oc y
Sk at eb oa r
Fig. 1. Three-Year-Old Boys’ Categorization of Boy Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
itt
0
0
Fig. 4. Three-Year-Old Girls’ Categorization of Boy Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
Like the 3-year-old girls, these 5-year-olds thought adults would approve of ‘‘girl toys’’ 100% of the time. And, like the 3-year-olds, 5-year-old girls and boys thought their opposite-sex parent would be more accepting of cross-gender choices (See Figures 5–8).
2
Parents’ Responses to the Child-Rearing Sex-Role Attitude Scale
1 0 Tea Set
Doll
Tutu
Gown
Straw Hat
Fig. 2. Three-Year-Old Boys’ Categorization of Girl Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
as they grew older. Five-year-old boys thought their fathers would approve of cross-gender choices just 9% of the time, while the 3-year-olds boys had predicted approval for cross-gender toy selections 20% of the time. Five-year-old boys predicted their mothers’ approval of cross-gender play (36%) would be lower than had 3-year-olds (20%).
The results of these interviews with children become more intriguing when put against the backdrop of their parents’ responses to the adapted ChildRearing Sex-Role Attitude Scale Table II (Burge, 1981) designed to gauge adults’ attitudes and beliefs about appropriate behavior and expectations. At least one of the parents of 22 of the 26 participating children (14 parents of 3-year-olds and 11 parents of 5-year-olds) completed the questionnaire (See Appendix) distributed to all consenting parents. Respondents were asked to answer nineteen
7 6
6 5
Girl Toy?
4
Dad Yes?
3
Mom Yes?
5 Boy Toy?
4
Dad Y es? 3
Mom Yes?
2 1
2
Fig. 3. Three-Year-Old Girls’ Categorization of Girl Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
Su it C oa t
Co at y
Straw Hat
Ar m
Gown
eb al l/ M itt
Tutu
Ba s
d oa r Doll
eb
Tea Set
Sk at
0
cl e
0
1
M ot oc y
# of Responses
7
# of Responses
8
Fig. 5. Five-Year-Old Boys’ Categorization of Boy Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
# of Responses
PreschoolersÕ Perceptions of Gender
361
7
DISCUSSION
6
These children’s responses to each series of questions: the way they sorted ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’, the support they reported for gender-typical choices, and their predictions of their parents’ approval for cross-gender choices, demonstrated that they had internalized stereotypical definitions of gender. These children’s behaviors are noteworthy because many of their parents described non-stereotypical attitudes and beliefs on the adapted Sex-Role Attitude Scale. These girls predicted parents would approve of cross-gender play between 20% (5-year-old girls’ predictions of mothers’ responses) to 40% (3-year-old girls’ predictions of fathers’ responses). These predictions do not agree with what their parents said: 100% indicated they would not be upset if their daughter wanted to play Little League, 88% thought girls should play with blocks and trucks (boy toys), and 46% agreed that they would be likely to buy their sons and daughters the same toys. The parents reported much higher levels of support for girls’ cross-gender play than these girls perceived. Similarly, boys thought parents would approve of cross-gender choices only between 9% (5-yearolds’ predictions of fathers’ approval) and 36% (3-year-olds’ prediction of mothers’ approval) of the time. Again, children’s responses indicated the messages they were getting about appropriate play did not align with parents’ professed beliefs. Sixty-four percent of these parents said they would buy their sons a doll, 84% reported they would not feel upset to see their son wear a dress in the dramatic play center, and 92% did not think ballet lessons for boys would be a mistake. It is noteworthy that 5-year-old boys predicted lower levels of support for cross-gender play than had girls or 3-year-old boys, and that the lowest approval ratings of all were their predictions of their fathers’ reactions. Even while children described little support for cross-gender choices, most parents’ responses indicated that they set the same standards of behavior for their sons and daughters. There was a high level of agreement that both girls and boys benefit from participating in competitive sports, need to be socially competent, and should be adept at math and science. Most of these parents also indicated they would not discourage their son from taking ballet or pursuing a nursing career, or their daughter from playing Little League baseball. They indicated they would be equally willing to borrow money for a son
5 Girl Toy?
4
Dad Y es? 3
Mom Yes?
2 1 0 Tea Set
Doll
Tutu
Gown
Straw Hat
Fig. 6. Five-Year-Old Boys’ Categorization of Girl Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
6
# of Responses
5 4
Girl Toy?
3
Dad Yes? Mom Yes?
2 1 0 Tea Set
Doll
Tutu
Gown
Straw Hat
Fig. 7. Five-Year-Old Girls’ Categorization of Girl Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
6 # of Responses
5 4
Boy Toy?
3
Dad Yes?
2
Mom Yes?
1
it C oa t Su
y
C oa t
itt m Ar
se ba ll/ M
cl e
Ba
ot oc y M
Sk
at eb oa r
d
0
Fig. 8. Five-Year-Old Girls’ Categorization of Boy Toys and Description of Parents’ Responses.
questions using a 5-point Likert scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. In the case of three children, all 3-year-olds, both parents responded. These were the only fathers who participated. For that reason mothers’ and fathers’ answers were not separated. Parents’ responses to the survey are reported in Table II.
362
Freeman Table II. Responses to Child-Rearing Sex-Role Attitude Scale (Adapted) N = 25 (22 mothers and 3 fathers) Strongly Strongly Disagree Agree or Agree Undecided or Disagree
Question 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.
Both boys and girls really need to develop social skills. Only boys should be permitted to play competitive sports. Quiet girls will have a happier life than assertive girls. It is only healthy for boys to cry when they have been hurt. I would discourage my son from saying that he wants to be a nurse when he grows up. I would buy my son and daughter the same kind of toys. Boys who exhibit sissy behaviors will never be well adjusted. Girls who are tomboys will never be well adjusted. Parents should set different behavior standards for girls and boys. I feel upset when I see boys put on a dress when they play dress-up. I would buy my son a doll. I would not hire a male babysitter. Boys, more than girls, need competitive sports A parent who would pay for ballet lessons for a son is asking for trouble. I would be more willing to borrow money to send a son to college than a daughter. I would be upset if my daughter wanted to play little league baseball. Girls should be encouraged to play with building blocks and toy trucks. Math and science are as necessary for girls as boys. I would feel disappointed if my daughter acted like a tomboy.
96% – 4% 20% – 46% 8% – – 8% 64% 12% – – – – 88% 100% 4%
– – 4% 4% 4% 21% 15% 8% 8% 8% 18% 15% 4% 8% – – 4% – –
4% 100% 92% 76% 96% 33% 77% 92% 92% 84% 18% 72%* 96% 92% 100% 100% 8% – 96%
*Does not total 100% because of rounding.
or daughter to attend college. The answers to these future-focused questions indicated these parents were nearly unanimous in rejecting common stereotypes for their children. They believed in providing girls and boys the same kinds of recreational and educational experiences and sought to offer them the same career options. Responses to other questions revealed, however, telling differences of opinion about the appropriateness of some gender-related behaviors, particularly on items relating to boys’ behaviors. Fewer than half (46%) said they would buy their sons and daughters the same kinds of toys and just over half (56%) indicated they would buy their son a doll. Almost one-fourth agreed, ‘‘It is only healthy for boys to cry when they have been hurt’’ and more than one-fourth agreed with the statement: ‘‘I would NOT hire a male babysitter’’. While these levels of acceptance are higher than boys had predicted, they reveal parents’ discomfort about boys’ behaviors that might be considered to be feminine. These parents expressed much less concern about girls who were tomboys or played with blocks. These responses indicated these parents’ expectations for their sons’ genderized play behaviors were narrower than were their expectations for their daughters, a finding that is consistent with previous studies indicating that boys’ gender roles are more rigidly defined than are girls’(Burge, 1981; Fagot & Littman, 1975).
The most interesting findings of this study relate to the mismatch it has revealed between parents’ descriptions of their expectations and career goals for their boys and girls and the messages children have received from their parents about how girls and boys ‘‘should’’ play. These parents report that their attitudes and beliefs are largely gender-neutral but their children’s opinions about which toys are for girls and which are for boys, and, most importantly, their predictions of their parents’ reactions to their crossgender play, reveal that children have constructed gender in stereotypical ways that are, in many cases, at odds with their parents’ professed beliefs. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates that these preschool children have constructed stereotypical definitions of ‘‘girl toys’’ and ‘‘boy toys’’. An explanation for children’s traditional choices may be found by looking to Kohlberg’s studies and other foundational works that establish how children between 3 and 5 years of age discover and construct their definition of gender, creating a set of criteria that separates ‘‘maleness’’ from ‘‘femaleness’’ and replicating behaviors they have seen modeled (Kohlberg, 1966; Kohlberg & Ullian, 1974). Their responses indicate that it is the developmental nature of preschoolers to rigidly apply prevalent gender stereotypes. It is possible that as they grow older they will be better able to conserve
PreschoolersÕ Perceptions of Gender gender, making cross-gender choices for toys and play more likely. This study also illustrates that these children believed that their parents were very supportive of their play with gender-typical toys but less accepting of cross-gender choices. It is possible that making adults aware of the inconsistent messages children received about how to take their place in the world as ‘‘girls’’ and ‘‘boys’’ and eventually as ‘‘men’’ and ‘‘women’’ may serve to open doors of possibility that will eventually reduce or eliminate the narrow constructions of gender that limit opportunities along genderized lines. And finally, and perhaps most importantly, this study demonstrates that these parents’ attitudes and beliefs about gender appropriate toys and behaviors have previously unidentified inconsistencies. Many parents indicated that they preferred that their young children behave in traditional genderized ways, even as they described goals and aspirations for them that were free from the gender stereotypes enforced in the past. Could it be that in spite of parents’ intentions to free their children from the constraints created by narrow gender stereotypes that the schema they developed in their own childhoods have proven difficult to replace? One is left to wonder why these children continue to define gender as traditionally as they do – remember that all girls thought the adults in their lives would approve of their play with the girl toys, and boys, correctly, perceived that dressing up in the tutu would not be acceptable, particularly to their fathers. In spite of the lip service these parents have paid to equality, children’s responses indicate that gender stereotypes are alive and well. An explanation may be found in the pervasive effect of the media that bombards many homes for many hours each day with messages of consumerism and sexism. Or it could be that these parents feel conflicted by their efforts to define gender for their children. They have discovered that broadening the definition of being a girl and being a boy does not do away with gender differences, but rather prompts them to pose the question, ‘‘How does one claim a genderized identity while casting away the traditional limitations that have defined gender in generations past?’’ This study forces the reader to consider the distinctions that exist between gender differences, gender stereotypes, and gender biases. It opens the door to continued reflection about the distinctions between these concepts and to think about how limitations created by stereotypes and biases can be removed to create equal opportunities for boys and girls.
363 Future avenues of research suggested by this study include an examination of how children’s definitions of gender appropriate play are evidenced in the play choices they make in their classrooms. Do they operationalize the definitions of girl toys and boy toys that they have constructed? Do adults enforce expectations about gender appropriate play as children predict they will? Another avenue of study suggested by this project is an examination of preschoolers’ homes and the messages about women’s work and men’s work they internalize based on their observations of their own parents’ division of labor. The limitations created by a small sample size cannot be ignored. This study is not generalizable beyond the children and parents who participated. There are lessons to be learned, however, even in a study of this size that should give the thoughtful teacher and parent pause when they choose toys and activities for children and encourage, or discourage, genderized behaviors when they see them. Implications for Parents and Professionals This study reminds parents and professionals they should be certain that when they interact with preschoolers in matters related to gender their behaviors accurately reflect their carefully considered values and beliefs. Beliefs and practices will most effectively be aligned when children are given choices intentionally and thoughtfully. If, for example, it is a father’s goal that his son develop dispositions of caring and nurturing, then he should support play and provide toys that give his child opportunities to exhibit those behaviors. That means he encourages his son to play with baby dolls and to role play the caregiving behaviors he models as a caring and engaged father. While boys reported getting unintended messages steering them away from cross-gender choices, girls reported unanimity related to parents’ acceptance of ‘‘girl toys’’. The implication of this finding is that adults should be conscious of how they encourage girls to make choices that reflect gender stereotypes. While thoughtful adults may agree that dolls, tea sets, and frilly dress up clothes are appropriate choices for girls, so are trucks, blocks and baseball mitts. Girls should be guided to make selections that reflect their interests, not ones that simply replicate the stereotypes created by media and marketing experts. Parents and professionals also send messages about gender roles by the ordinary routines they
364
Freeman
create at home and school. Children should be encouraged to participate in same-sex and mixedgender groups to work and play. Chores should be assigned based on children’s abilities and interests rather than on stereotyped assumptions that boys are strong and girls are suited to tasks that stretch neither their muscles nor their minds. Adults are powerful role models, coaches, and cheerleaders as children map out the dimensions of
their gender identity. This study demonstrates the importance of sending messages that accurately reflect their values and beliefs so that children can realize their hopes and dreams unfettered by outdated stereotypes and limitations. They should take care to avoid miscommunication and mixed messages, and should consider the hidden truths uncovered by this research.
APPENDIX Child-Rearing Sex-Role Attitude Scale (Adapted from Burge, 1981) Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each statement. Do you Strongly Agree, Strongly Disagree, or is your opinion somewhere in between these extremes? Mark one choice for each item.
PreschoolersÕ Perceptions of Gender
REFERENCES Burge, P. L. (1981). Parental child-rearing sex-role attitudes related to social issue sex-role attitudes and selected demographic variables. Home Economics Research Journal, 9(3), 193–199. Cahill B., & Adams, E. (1997). An exploratory study of early childhood teachersÕs attitudes about gender roles. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 36(7/8), 517–529. Daniel, D. (1999, July). The name game. Bicycling, 25. Fagot, B. I., & Littman, I. (1975). Stability of sex role and play interests from preschool to elementary school. Journal of Psychology, 89, 285–292. Fisher-Thompson, D. (1990). Adult sex typing of childrenÕs toys. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 23(5), 291–304. Frawley, T. (2005). Gender bias in the classroom: Current controversies and implications. Childhood Education, 81, 221–227. Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of childrenÕs sex role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 82–172). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Kohlberg, L., & Ullian, D. Z. (1974). Stages in the development of psychosexual concepts and attitudes. In R. C. Friedman, R. M. Richart, & R. L. Vande Wiele (Eds.), Sex differences in behavior (pp. 209–222). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
365
Martin, C. L. (1990). Attitudes and expectation about children with nontraditional and traditional gender roles. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 22(3/4), 151–165. Martin, C. L. (1995). Stereotypes about children with traditional and nontraditional gender roles. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 33(11), 727–752. Martin, C. H., Wood, J., & Little, J. K. (1990). The development of gender stereotype components. Child Development, 61(6), 1891–1905. Martin, C. L., & Ruble, D. (2004). ChildrenÕs search for gender cues: Cognitive perspectives on gender development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(2), 67–70. Moulton, J. L III, & Adams-Price, C. E. (1997). Homosexuality, heterosexuality, and cross-dressing: Perceptions of gender discordant behavior. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 37(5/ 6), 441–451. Powlishta, K. K., Serbin, L. A., & Moller, L. C. (1993). The stability of individual differences in gender typing: implications for understanding gender segregation. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 29(11–12), 723–738. Raag, T, & Rackliff, C. L. (1998). PreschoolersÕ awareness of social expectations of gender: relationships to toy choices. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 38(9/10), 685–701.
366 Russell, R., & Tyler, M. (2002). Thank heaven for little girls: ÔGirl HeavenÕ and the commercial context of feminine childhood. Sociology, 36(3), 619–637. Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How our schools cheat girls. New York: Touchstone. Sandnabba, K. N., & Ahlberg, C. (1999). ParentsÕ attitudes and expectations about childrenÕs cross-gender behavior. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 40(3-4), 249–257.
Freeman Turner, P. J., & Gervai, J. (1995). A multidimensional study of gender typing in preschool children and their parents: personality, attitudes, preferences, behavior, and cultural differences. Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 759–773.
