HI i ave no idea how to actuall write an A grade essay for psychology. i jus typed one up below, wud appreciate it if ppl could give me feedback on wat ive done right or wrong plz. its 731 words btw - is it too long or too shot?? plus i dont kno ho wlong it took me - i think maybe jus 35-40 mins which is too long rite>? Thanx
Discuss the role of genes and hormones in gender development. (25 Marks)
According to the Biological approach, gender development is influenced and controlled by genetics that encode for hormones. The biological approach stresses the importance that gender occurs as a result of nature rather than nurture. It is thought that gender related behaviour is influenced by an over or under exposure to sex hormones (androgens and oestrogen). Research has been carried out to investigate the effects of genes and hormones on gender development.
Young (1966) has shown the effects of over exposure of the opposite sex hormones on sexual behaviour of rats. Female rats arch over during sexual activity and male rats mount the female rats. However, Young injected the female rates with androgens (male hormones) and injected oestrogen (female hormones) into the male rates during a critical period of development. The rat’s behaviours were observed and showed an opposite in behaviours. The female rats now tried to mount the male rats and the male rats arch over. This therefore shows that hormones affect gender behaviour and development. However, it is important to remember that the study was done on non-humans and so cannot be generalised to humans, despite rats being genetically similar to humans. Although, the use of non-human participants allows for independent variables to be systematically manipulated providing reliable data.
Money (1972) used a case study to support the idea that hormones affected gender development. Money studied a group of girls that had been exposed to high levels of testosterone ‘in utero’ through anti miscarriage drugs. These girls were compared to their non-exposed sisters and their mothers were asked to comment on their behaviour and choice of toys/clothes. A difference was reported, with the exposed girls being reported as more boyish with a higher IQ. This suggests that exposure to high levels of androgens had affected their gender development. Nevertheless, it has been suggested that the questions were misleading such as ‘Which of your daughters are more boyish’ suggesting that one of them has to be boyish. A follow up study found only one difference – the exposed girls were more active. Hines also disagreed with Moneys findings and so carried out a study examining play shown by girls and boys aged 3-8 years who had congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH – When embryos are exposed to high levels of androgens). Hines found minor differences, except girls preferred playing with boys, which suggests that hormones had little effect on behaviour.
Deady (2006) looked at the relationship between gender role orientation and testosterone levels in ‘child free’ women to support the importance of hormones. Deady asked participants to complete Bems SRI Questionnaire and answer questions about their desire for children. Results showed a correlation of the higher testosterone levels found in saliva, the lower the females desire for children. This suggests that the high levels of testosterone are related to a low maternal drive. However, the study revealed a correlation which is not a causal finding.
However, the biological approach in general has been criticised for being generally deterministic and reductionist and does not take into account the influence of the environment and social interactions which may be best explained by other theories.
Alternately, the biosocial approach may be more appropriate as it takes into account the interaction between the genetics and the environment. The social constructive theory forms the biosocial approach and argues that gender is formed through social construction that changes over time and culture through language. It suggests that masculinity and femininity are not fixed and can be shown in various ways. This idea has been supported by Mac and Connell (1995) who identified different groups of masculinity in a British school. They found that there were the ‘High Achievers’, ‘Macho Lads’, ‘New Entrepreneurs’ and ‘Real Englishmen’ which all showed masculinity as a result of social construction. The biosocial theory is more appropriate because it takes into account both biological and social influences.
In conclusion, the research described and evaluated above does show support for the idea that genetic coding for hormones does affect our gender development and therefore behaviour. On the other hand, it has also been shown that some of the studies have methodological flaws and have been criticised by further research suggesting the results are not as they seem. Perhaps also, gender development is better explained by the biosocial approach due to being less deterministic and fixed.