The objective of the proposed project is to test the value of a cognitive-social psychological framework for thinking about the sexes. The framework goes beyond extant work on sex stereotypes in four major ways. First, personal gender stereotypes (Lippman's """"""""pictures in the head"""""""" of an individual perceiver) are distinguished from cultural stereotypes (beliefs that are widely shared in a particular society). Second, we consider together the """"""""causes,"""""""" """"""""contents,"""""""" and """"""""consequences"""""""" of sex stereotypes. Two types of causes are posited, distal and proximal. Distal (or outside of the individual's head) causes are: degree of exposure to mainstream American culture (and, hence, exposure to cultural stereotypes); relationships with specific men and women. There are also two primary types of proximal (or inside the head) causes considered: Identities and Personal Goals. In terms of consequences, we focus on social information processing. Third, a broader view of the contents of thinking about the sexes is here taken than has been the case in most previous work. In addition to beliefs about the superordinate gender categories (or, gender stereotypes, which have been the focus of most prior work), we suggest that people have thoughts and feelings about types of men and women (""""""""businessman,"""""""" """"""""career woman"""""""") and about specific women and men. Further, we add feelings and images to the trait adjectives which are used almost exclusively as the elements of sex stereotypes in extant work. Fourth, we test various alternative ways of representing how beliefs about the sexes are structured in memory. A group of college sophomores will participate in nine separate data gathering sessions. Although causes and consequences will be assessed, the focus of the project will be contents of thinking about the sexes, especially those neglected by previous researchers (i.e., gender sub-types, specific men and women). In data analysis and idiographic approach will be taken, i.e., the individual will be the unit of analysis. In addition, however, three nomothetic properties of thinking about the sexes (i.e., Gender Differentiation, Gender Traditionality, Differential Gender Evaluation) will be assessed and linked to both hypothesized causes and consequences. The mental health implications of this comprehensive approach to how individuals think about the sexes are great. For example, our Gender Differentiation variable allows us to test the following questions: Do some people see men and women as extremely different, even opposing groups? Does such thinking bias the impression formation process?
