Children's assumptions about the generalizability of sex-typed abilities

Abstract

Children (mean age = 103 months) were provided with information about the relative abilities of two stimulus children at a specific activity. They then were asked to predict which child would likely be superior at a second highly related activity. The two stimulus children were either same sex or opposite sex, and the activities in each pair were sex typed as male or female. The design was a 2 (sex of subject) × 2 (age of subject) × 4 (stimulus pair—MM, FF, MF, FM) × 2 (sex type of activities) mixed design, with sex of subject and age of subject as the between-subjects factors. Each child responded to 32 instances, representing four replications of eight possible combinations. The dependent variable was the child's choice of the initially superior child or initially inferior child as better at the second activity. The prediction was that children would be less likely to assume that superiority could generalize to a second activity if the initial superiority contradicted sexstereotyped expectations. This result would indicate that sex stereotypes interfere with inferences processes, supporting a scehmatic model of sex stereotyping. The results were consistent with the prediction. Compared to a baseline condition in which sex stereotypes were not relevant, children were less likely to choose the initially superior child when the sex stereotype had been violated, and more likely to select that child when it had been confirmed.