Abstract
How fundamentally different do people generally think men and women are? Gender essentialism refers to beliefs that women and men have distinct, innate, and fixed biological essences that differentiate them from each other. Exposure to popularized neuroscience research may shape such views. We examined whether exposure to scientific evidence for gender differences or similarities in the brain affects beliefs about gender essentialism, and indirectly shapes sexism and justification of gender inequality, using samples from Turkey. Study 1 (n = 414 undergraduates) showed that exposure to evidence on brain similarities led to lower gender essentialist beliefs, which, in turn, negatively predicted sexism and justification of gender inequality. Unexpectedly, exposure to evidence on gender differences did not lead to an increase in gender essentialist beliefs. Although men scored higher than women on all measures, the indirect effects were significant for both men and women. In Study 2 (n = 119 online community respondents), we found indirect effects of exposure to evidence of brain similarities on justification of gender inequality. We discuss the implications of our findings for challenging gender essentialist views among students and the general public through exposure to research on gender similarities and increased critical thinking about scientific research evidence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2006). Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.03.003.
BBC News. (2013, December 3). Kadın beyni ve erkek beyni arasındaki farklar [The differences between men’s and women’s brains]. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler/2013/12/131202_beyin_kadin_erkek. Accessed Sept 2018.
Brescoll, V., & LaFrance, M. (2004). The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science, 15(8), 515–520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00712.x.
Brescoll, V. L., Uhlmann, E. L., & Newman, G. E. (2013). The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(6), 891–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034701.
Byrd, W. C., & Hughey, M. W. (2015). Biological determinism and racial essentialism: The ideological double helix of racial inequality. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 661(1), 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215591476.
Ching, B. H. H., & Xu, J. T. (2018). The effects of gender neuroessentialism on transprejudice: An experimental study. Sex Roles, 78(3–4), 228–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0786-3.
Coleman, J. M., & Hong, Y. Y. (2008). Beyond nature and nurture: The influence of lay gender theories on self-stereotyping. Self and Identity, 7(1), 34–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860600980185.
Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2006). Exposure to scientific theories affects women's math performance. Science, 314(5798), 435–435. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1131100.
Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2011). Genetic essentialism: On the deceptive determinism of DNA. Psychological Bulletin, 137(5), 800–818. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021860.
David, S. P., Naudet, F., Laude, J., Radua, J., Fusar-Poli, P., Chu, I., … Ioannidis, J. P. (2018). Potential reporting bias in neuroimaging studies of sex differences. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23976-1.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.
Fine, C. (2008). Will working mothers’ brains explode? The popular new genre of neurosexism. Neuroethics, 1(1), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-007-9004-2.
Fine, C. (2010). From scanner to sound bite: Issues in interpreting and reporting sex differences in the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 280–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410383248.
Fine, C. (2013). Is there neurosexism in functional neuroimaging investigations of sex differences? Neuroethics, 6(2), 369–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-012-9169-1.
Fine, C., Jordan-Young, R., Kaiser, A., & Rippon, G. (2013). Plasticity, plasticity, plasticity … and the rigid problem of sex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(11), 550–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.08.010.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
Haslam, N. O. (1998). Natural kinds, human kinds, and essentialism. Social Research, 65(2), 291–314.
Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(1), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164363.
Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice? British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165072.
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Publications.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(7302), 29–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/466029a.
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581.
Hyde, J. S. (2007). New directions in the study of gender similarities and differences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(5), 259–263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00516.x.
Ingalhalikar, M., Smith, A., Parker, D., Satterthwaite, T. D., Elliott, M. A., Ruparel, K., … Verma, R. (2014). Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(2), 823–828. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1316909110.
Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498.
Kaiser, A., Haller, S., Schmitz, S., & Nitsch, C. (2009). On sex/gender related similarities and differences in fMRI language research. Brain Research Reviews, 61(2), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2009.03.005.
Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of" poor but happy" and" poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 823–837. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823.
Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 686–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.686.
Kimel, S. Y., Huesmann, R., Kunst, J. R., & Halperin, E. (2016). Living in a genetic world: How learning about interethnic genetic similarities and differences affects peace and conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(5), 688–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216642196.
Klysing, A. (2020). Exposure to scientific explanations for gender differences influences individuals’ personal theories of gender and their evaluations of a discriminatory situation. Sex Roles, 82, 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01060-w.
Kray, L. J., Howland, L., Russell, A. G., & Jackman, L. M. (2017). The effects of implicit gender role theories on gender system justification: Fixed beliefs strengthen masculinity to preserve the status quo. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000124.
Levy, S. R., Stroessner, S. J., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1421–1436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1421.
Maney, D. L. (2014). Just like a circus: The public consumption of sex differences. In G. Lee, J. Illes, & F. Ohl (Eds.), Current topics in behavioral neurosciences (pp. 279–296). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/7854_2014_339.
Morton, T. A., Postmes, T., Haslam, S. A., & Hornsey, M. J. (2009). Theorizing gender in the face of social change: Is there anything essential about essentialism? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 653–664. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012966.
No, S., Hong, Y. Y., Liao, H. Y., Lee, K., Wood, D., & Chao, M. M. (2008). Lay theory of race affects and moderates Asian Americans' responses toward American culture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 991–1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012978.
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2014). Gender on the brain: A case study of science communication in the new media environment. PLoS One, 9(10), e110830. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110830.
Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (2006). Essentializing differences between women and men. Psychological Science, 17(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01675.x.
Prentice, D., & Miller, D. (2007). Psychological essentialism of human categories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(4), 202–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00504.x.
Rangel, U., & Keller, J. (2011). Essentialism goes social: Belief in social determinism as a component of psychological essentialism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(6), 1056–1078. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022401.
Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6), 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00355.x.
Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2002). Çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Ambivalent sexism scale: A study of validity and reliability]. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17(49), 47–58.
Skewes, L., Fine, C., & Haslam, N. (2018). Beyond mars and venus: The role of gender essentialism in support for gender inequality and backlash. PLoS One, 13(7), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200921.
Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199.
Verkuyten, M. (2003). Discourses about ethnic group (de-) essentialism: Oppressive and progressive aspects. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466603322438215.
Williams, M. J., & Eberhardt, J. L. (2008). Biological conceptions of race and the motivation to cross racial boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 1033–1047. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1033.
Wilton, L. S., Bell, A. N., Carpinella, C. M., Young, D. M., Meyers, C., & Clapham, R. (2019). Lay theories of gender influence support for women and transgender people’s legal rights. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(7), 883–894. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618803608.
World Economic Forum. (2019). The global gender gap report 2020. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2020.pdf. Accessed May 2019.
World Wildlife Fund. (2018, October 8). Yeni IPCC raporu: Küresel ısınmayı 1,5°C’de tutmak için acilen harekete geçilmeli [New IPCC report: Urgent action must be taken to limit global warming at 1.5 °C]. Retrieved from http://www.wwf.org.tr/?8100/yeni-ipcc-raporu-kuresel-isinmayi-birbucuk-derecede-tutmak-icin-acilen-harekete-gecilmeli. Accessed Sept 2018.
Yoder, J. D., Fischer, A. R., Kahn, A. S., & Groden, J. (2007). Changes in students’ explanations for gender differences after taking a psychology of women class: More constructionist and less essentialist. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(4), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00390.x.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval for the studies reported in this paper have been obtained from Bogazici University Social Sciences and Humanities Ethics Board for Research with Human Participants (SBINAREK). Participants provided informed consent before the study and received a written debriefing form after the study. The materials were used in Turkish.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 85 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Şahin, Ö., Soylu Yalcinkaya, N. The Gendered Brain: Implications of Exposure to Neuroscience Research for Gender Essentialist Beliefs. Sex Roles 84, 522–535 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01181-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01181-7