Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Comparing the different approaches to gender development

VIEWS: 40 PAGES: 10

									COMPARING THE
     DIFFERENT
APPROACHES TO
        GENDER
  DEVELOPMENT
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
      PSYCHODYNAMIC APPROACHES
 Similarities:
 Both say that the environment af fects our gender
  development.
 Both say we identify with the same -sex parent and copy their
  behaviour
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
      PSYCHODYNAMIC APPROACHES
 Dif ferences:
 The learning approach says that our gender identity develops
  throughout our lives, the psychodynamic approach says that it
  occurs from ages 3-6 during the oedipus/electra complexes.
 The psychodynamic approach says that progression through
  the developmental stages is a natural occurrence and that the
  environment af fects us dif ferently at each stage. The learning
  approach says that our nature has a minimal af fect on us and
  that the way that the environment af fects us is consistent
  throughout our lives.
 The psychodynamic approach uses case studies to support its
  theories whereas the learning approach uses lab studies,
  often done on animals.
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
      PSYCHODYNAMIC APPROACHES
 AO2:
 An advantage of the learning approach is that it is more
  scientific than the psychodynamic approach. By focusing on
  behaviour, the learning approach can devise experiments to
  objectively observe what factors cause a change in behaviour
  in participants. With its focus on the unconscious, the
  psychodynamic approach cannot directly observe the factors
  that af fect gender development.
 An advantage of the psychodynamic approach is that it is less
  reductionist than the learning approach. The learning
  approach reduces all of our personality down to learnt
  reactions to environmental stimuli. The psychodynamic
  approach is more complex and considers how some parts of
  our personality are innate, how some are learnt, and how they
  interact.
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
        BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 Similarities
 Both approaches use laboratory studies to establish causal
  relationships and to isolate which factors (IVs) af fect which
  behaviours (DVs). The biological approach aims to see which
  hormones af fect which behaviours while the learning
  approach aims to see which environmental cues af fect which
  behaviours.
 Both approaches use animal studies. They believe that
  animals respond biologically (the biological approach) and
  learn (the learning approach) in the same way as humans, and
  so the results of their studies can generalise to humans.
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
        BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 Dif ferences:
 The biological approach says that our genes are mainly
  responsible for our behaviour and the learning approach says
  that our environment is mainly responsible.
 As well as using Laboratory studies, the biological approach
  also sometimes uses case studies of abnormal gender
  development, eg the case of David Reimer. The Learning
  approach is less likely to use case study evidence.
      COMPARING THE LEARNING AND
        BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 AO2:
 A strength of both approaches are that they are scientific.
  They both study material that can be objectively observed ( eg
  hormone levels, copying of a role model) and devise studies
  that can be replicated.
 Both approaches are weakened by their extreme positions at
  either end of the nature -nurture debate. Neither of them take
  into account how nature and nurture af fect each other. Eg a
  male might be naturally aggressive, but he can learn to
  behave in less aggressive ways if he is brought up in a calm
  environment.
 COMPARING THE PSYCHODYNAMIC AND
      BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 Similarities:
 Both focus on how our nature determines our gender
  development. The psychodynamic approach says that our
  libido naturally drives to go through the phallic stage of
  development. The biological approach says that our genes
  naturally determine our gender development.
 They both use case studies to examine gender development.
  This is the main research method of the psychodynamic
  approach (eg little Hans). The biological approach uses case
  studies in rare cases or where it would not be appropriate to
  conduct a laboratory experiment ( eg case of David Reimer)
 COMPARING THE PSYCHODYNAMIC AND
      BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 Dif ferences.
 The psychodynamic approach says that our parents greatly
  af fect our development by how they respond to us during the
  oedipus/electra complex. The biological approach says unless
  our parents are abusive and harm our physical development,
  they have little influence on our gender development.
 The biological approach is uses quantitative methods such as
  measuring the amount of testosterone present in the womb
  and seeing how this af fects development. The psychodynamic
  approach uses qualitative methods such as dream analysis to
  determine children’s true feelings about their parents.
 COMPARING THE PSYCHODYNAMIC AND
      BIOLOGICAL APPROACHES
 AO2:
 The biological approach is more scientific than the
  psychodynamic approach and so has the advantage that other
  researchers can replicate their studies to check their findings.
  However, by only using scientific methods, the biological
  approach never asks how people are feeling. By using non -
  scientific methods, the psychodynamic approach gets a more
  rounded view of how peoples emotions and interpersonal
  relations af fect their gender identity.
 A problem of both approaches is that they both say that
  gender identity is determined by a certain time (biological
  approach – in the womb; psychodynamic approach – age 6)
  and cannot change after that. Both approaches ignore the
  impact of the environment after these times.

								
To top