Biological differences have often been used in psychology in order to reinforce that fact that if our biology’s are different and unchangeable, so also will the psychological differences be very different. This assumption is both oppressive to women and destructive.
This bias, however, has not only predominated in attitudes towards women, but is also a heterosexist bias which, according to Malim and Birch, is defined as “viewing heterosexism as normal and homosexuality as deviant”. This means that heterosexuality may be seen as the normal and desirable state of an individual whereas other sexual orientations are seen as being deficient.
For over a century, both homosexuality and bisexuality were generally assumed to be mental illnesses. It was not until 1957 that a study by Hooker (1957) questioned this. She studied both hetero and homosexual men and found no difference on projective test responses. Further to this, studies showed no difference in measures of cognitive abilities between heterosexual and homosexual men, (Tuttle & Pillard, 1991) and also on psychological well-being and self-esteem (Coyle, 1993; Herek, 1990; Savin-Williams, 1990). On a study of bisexual men and women Fox (1996), found no evidence of psychopathology. On top of this, extensive literature has shown that both homosexual and bisexual people have few significant differences to heterosexual people, and this has been demonstrated on a wide range of variables associated with overall psychological functioning (Pillard, 1988; Rothblum, 1994, Gonsiorek, 1991).
Although there are still studies today, which claim that homosexuality, and bisexuality is a mental illness, most have been declared as methodologically unsound. They do not contain empirical evidence to support these beliefs and thus can lead to incorrect representations of lesbian, gay and bisexual people. In his review of such literature, Gonsiorek(1991) discovered serious flaws such as unclear definition of terms, inaccurate subject classification, inappropriate group comparisons, an ignorance of important social aspects, and debatable measures used for the outcome.
And yet, it was not until 1975 that the American psychological Association issued a statement that “Homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social or vocational capabilities”. (Conger, 1975, p.633)
Although this statement was issued over 25 years ago, many psychologists, especially feminists, will argue that homosexuality still rarely features as part of psychology courses. For example, Louise Clarke (1989) talking about homosexuality in undergraduate courses says “ our existence should be acknowledged and reflected not just in the lecture room, but also in the curriculum”.
The embarrassing lack of key female psychologists has given rise to the feminist movement within psychology. Feminists have not only highlighted the problem of male bias towards women, but also made people more aware of other biases that exist, such as sexual preferences, old age and disability.
Because, over the last century, psychology has been led by white masculine theories and methods, it has not placed sufficient emphasis upon many important aspects of women’s’ lives. This can be damaging to both men and women as it lacks clarity. Matlin (1993) lists a number of important life events which may have been invisible in male dominated psychology, such as: how women cope in male dominated environments, i.e. the workplace. Purely female life experiences, such as, pregnancy and the menopause as well as experiences that are often only experienced by women such as sexual harassment and rape.
From a feminist perception, it is necessary for researchers to become holistically involved in their research rather than being an investigator who is detached from the process.
Richard Gross(1995) cites the Task Force of APA Division 35, that feminist research in psychology tends to be “co-operative, participative…interdisciplinary and non-hierarchical… beginning with personal experience and recognizing that “truth is not separate from the person who speaks it” (quoted in Wilkinson 1989)
Another interesting perspective comes from Malim and Birch (1998) who refer to sexism as “old and new sexism”. The most extreme illustrations of “old sexism” would see women as having a biological disposition to become witches, mothers or sex symbols. They issue caution to seeing sexism as “a characteristic of extreme groups, not a problem, something to be ignored (because to raise it as an issue only perpetuates it), women’s fault”.
So if this is “old sexism”, what are the signs to look out for today? Typical signs of gender bias in the “new sexism” of today are to be found by observing how theories and research have been formulated. Do they make comparisons between roles of males and females or are they looking for differences? It is important to observe what basis tests use and if they treat both males and females in an appropriate manner. Having a “token” woman is another sign of sexism. Often women are appointed to certain areas in order to avoid controversy. However, the “gatekeepers” ensure that they stay in the minority and may also limit their research interests. This is often visible in how women fare in hierarchies, especially in academic careers.
Gender bias can be visible in the words used when describing what women do. We often hear the word “he” being used to refer to both of the sexes. Also, in research, journals often tend to publish results which emphasis the differences between men and women, but ignore tests which may highlight some of their more positive and interesting similarities. Also they often highlight studies that show where females have a disadvantage, ignoring ones that show females coming out equally or better than males.
How psychology has produced gender bias in theories and research has been defined by Hare-Mustin & Maracek(1990) as alpha bias and beta bias. Theories with alpha bias exaggerate differences between men and women whilst beta bias theories minimise these differences.
In summary, gender bias is present in psychology in different forms. Originating with the fact that psychology has been male dominated over the past century. This then led to sexism in that many experiments were carried out only by males, on males and many standards and norms were set in relation to men, ignoring women’s standards and setting their standard at the male norm. This applied not only to women, but both men and women have been discriminated against through heterosexist bias. One reaction to this bias has been illustrated through the feminist movement, with feminist psychologists who have challenged many of the hitherto practices.
Today, with a strong awareness of bias within psychology, most psychologists and psychology undergraduates look for ways to eliminate bias and also to act upon existing bias when encountered. On an individual level, it is important to be aware of what biases may exist to others and to be aware of one’s own personal bias, which is often a “blind spot”. It is not enough to feel for the victims of bias, but to become proactive and resist bias.
It is both energising and challenging to observe psychology continue to redefine itself and its boundaries with the realisation of existing bias, and the willingness of many for change and improvement. This change lies within the hands of all psychologists today and is not only a gender issue but also an ethical one.
Reference List
Malim Tony,& Birch Anne (1998) Introductory Psychology. Macmillan Press Ltd.
Hooker, E. (1957). The adjustment of the male over homosexual. Journal of Projective Techniques, 21, 18-31.
Tuttle, G., & Pillard, R. (1991). Sexual orientation and cognitive abilities. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 20(3), 307-318
Coyle, A. (1993). A study of psychological well-being among gay men using the GHQ-30. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 32(2), 218-220.
Savin-Williams, R. (1990). Gay and lesbian youth: Expressions of identity. New York: Hemisphere.
Fox, R. (1996). Bisexuality in perspective: A review of theory and research. In B. Firestein (Ed.), Bisexuality: The psychology and politics of an invisible minority (pp. 3-50). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Pillard, R. (1988). Sexual orientation and mental disorder. Psychiatric Annals, 18(1), 51-56.
Gonsiorek, J. (1993). Mental health issues of gay and lesbian adolescents. In L. Garnets & D. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay male experiences (pp. 469-485). New York: Columbia University Press
Conger, J. (1975). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association for the year 1974: Minutes of the annual meeting of the council of representatives. American Psychologist, 30, 620-651.
Hare-Mustin, R.T. & Maracek, J. (1990) Making a difference: Psychology and the construction of gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
Gross, R. (1995) Themes, Issues and Debates in Psychology. Hodder and Stoughton
Wilkinson, S (1989) The impact of feminist research: Issues of legitimacy. Philosophical Psychology, 2 (3), 261-9
