RÓŻNICE PŁCIOWE W EMPATYZOWANIU I SYSTEMATYZOWANIU: EFEKT STEREOTYPU PŁCI ORAZ WPŁYW APROBATY SPOŁECZNEJ
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Instytut Psychologii
Data publikacji: 30-03-2019
 
Studia Humanistyczne AGH 2019;18(1):95–111
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
STRESZCZENIE
Podstawowym celem przedstawionych badań było testowanie hipotez o możliwym wpływie czynników społeczno-kulturowych na istniejące różnice płciowe w zakresie empatyzowania oraz systematyzowania. W pierwszym badaniu kontrolowano efekt zmiennej aprobaty społecznej na różnice płciowe w tych dwóch wymiarach. W badaniu drugim testowano hipotezę o wpływie aktywizowania stereotypu płci na poziom empatyzowania i systematyzowania (w pomiarze zadaniowym oraz samoopisowym). W obu badaniach i obu typach pomiaru kobiety w sposób spójny uzyskały wyniki wyższe od mężczyzn w wymiarze empatyzowania (o umiarkowanej sile efektu). Nie wykazano efektu wpływu zmiennej aprobaty społecznej na wielkość różnic płciowych w zakresie empatyzowania. Jednak aktywizowanie stereotypu płci sprawiło, że kobiety starały się prezentować jako bardziej empatyczne. Dodatkowo aktywizowanie stereotypu płci doprowadziło – wyłącznie u mężczyzn – do polepszenia wykonania zadania mierzącego tendencję do systematyzowania.
 
REFERENCJE (59)
1.
Baldner, C., & McGinley, J.J. 2014. Correlational and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) of commonly used empathy questionnaires: New insights. “Motivation and Emotion”, 38(5), 727-744.
 
2.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2002. The extreme male brain theory of autism. “Trends in Cognitive Sciences”, 6, 248-254.
 
3.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2003. The essential difference: Men, women and the extreme male brain. London: Penguin.
 
4.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2004. The cognitive neuroscience of autism. “Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry”, 75, 945-948.
 
5.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2006. The hyper-systemizing, assortative mating theory of autism. “Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry”, 30, 865-872.
 
6.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2007. The evolution of empathizing and systemizing: assortative mating of two strong systemizers and the cause of autism. In: R.I.M. Dunbar & L. Barrett (eds.) The Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology, pp. 213-226. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 
7.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2009. Autism: the empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory. In M., Miller, (ed.) The Year in Cognitive Neuroscience. “Annals of the New York Academy of Science”, 1156, 68-80.
 
8.
Baron-Cohen, S. 2010. Empathizing, systemizing, and the extreme male brain theory of autism. “Progress in Brain Research”, 186, 167-175.
 
9.
Baron-Cohen, S., Knickmeyer, R., & Belmonte, M. 2005. Sex differences in the brain: implications for explaining autism. “Science”, 310, 819-823.
 
10.
Baron-Cohen, S., Richler, J., Bisarya, D., Gunathan, N. & Wheelwright, S. 2003. The Systemizing Quotient (SQ): An investigation of adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism, and normal sex differences. “Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London”, 358, 361-374.
 
11.
Baron-Cohen, S., Riviere, A., Cross, P., Fukushima, M., Bryant, C., Sotillo, M., Hadwin, J., & French, D. 1996. Reading the mind in the face: a cross-cultural and developmental study. “Visual Cognition”, 3, 39-59.
 
12.
Baron-Cohen, S. & Wheelwright, S. 2004. The Empathy Quotient (EQ). An investigation of adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism, and normal sex differences. “Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders”, 34, 163-175.
 
13.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y. & Plumb, I. 2001. The ‘Reading the Mind in the eyes’ test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism. “Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry”, 42, 241-252.
 
14.
Baron-Cohen, S, Wheelwright, S, Scahill, V, Spong, A, & Lawson, J. 2001. Studies of theory of mind: are intuitive physics and intuitive psychology independent? “Journal of Developmental and Learning Disorders”, 5, 47-78.
 
15.
Bar-On, R. 2004. The Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): Rationale, description and summary of psychometric properties. In G. Geher (ed.) Measuring emotional intelligence: Common ground and controversy, pp. 115-145. New York: Nova Science.
 
16.
Bateson, C.D. 2009. These things called empathy: Eight related but distinct phenomena. In J. Decety & W. Ickes (eds.) The social neuroscience of empathy, pp. 3-15. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
 
17.
Berthoz, S., Wessa, M., Kedia, G., Wicker, B., & Grèzes, J. 2008. Cross-cultural validation of the empathy quotient in a French-speaking sample. “The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry / La Revue Canadienne de Psychiatrie”, 53(7), 469-477.
 
18.
Block, J. 1965. The challenge of response sets. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
 
19.
Cabello, R, Sorrel, M.A., Fernandez-Pinto, I., Extremera, N. & Fernandez-Berrocal, P. 2016. Age and gender differences in ability emotional intelligence in adults: A cross-sectional study. “Developmental Psychology”, 52, 1486-1492.
 
20.
Chakrabarti, B., Bullmore, E., & Baron-Cohen, S. 2006. Empathizing with basic emotions: common and discrete neural substrates. “Social Neuroscience”, 1, 364-384.
 
21.
Crowne, D.P., & Marlowe, D. 1960. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. “Journal of Consulting Psychology”, 24, 349-354.
 
22.
Davis, M.H. 1980. Individual differences in empathy: A multidimensional approach. “Dissertation Abstracts International”, 40, 3480.
 
23.
De Waal, F.B.M. 2008. Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 279-300.
 
24.
De Waal, F.B.M. 2009. The age of empathy: Nature’s lessons for a kinder society. New York: Harmony Books.
 
25.
Franceschini, G., Galli, S., Chiesi, F., & Primi, C. 2014. Implicit gender–math stereotype and women's susceptibility to stereotype threat and stereotype lift. “Learning and Individual Differences”, 32, 273-277.
 
26.
Goldenfeld, N., Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. 2005. Empathizing and systemizing in males, females, and autism. “Clinical Neuropsychiatry”, 2, 338-345.
 
27.
Grand, J.A., Ryan, A.M., Schmitt, N., & Hmurovic, J. 2011. How far does stereotype threat reach? The potential detriment of face validity in cognitive ability testing. “Human Performance”, 24, 1-28.
 
28.
Groen, Y., Fuermaier, A.M., Den Heijer, A.E., Tucha, O., & Althaus, M. 2015. The Empathy and Systemizing Quotient: The psychometric properties of the Dutch version and a review of the cross-cultural stability. “Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders”, 45, 2848-2864.
 
29.
Harkness, K.L., Jacobson, J. A., Duong, D., & Sabbagh, M. A. 2010. Mental state decoding in past major depression: Effect of sad versus happy mood induction. “Cognition & Emotion”, 24, 497-513.
 
30.
Iacoboni, M. 2009. Mirroring people. New York, NY: Picador.
 
31.
Kim, J., & Lee, S.J. 2010. Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Empathy Quotient Scale. “Psychiatry Investigation”, 7, 24–30.
 
32.
Knickmeyer, R., Baron-Cohen, S., Raggatt, P. & Taylor, K. 2006. Fetal testosterone and empathy. “Hormones & Behaviour”, 49, 282-292.
 
33.
Lawrence, E.J., Shaw, P., Baker, D., Baron-Cohen, S., & David, A.S. 2004. Measuring empathy: reliability and validity of the Empathy Quotient. “Psychological Medicine”, 34, 911-919.
 
34.
Niedźwieńska, A. & Neckar, J. 2013. Pozytywna tendencyjność w pamięci źródła informacji na własny temat (Positivity bias in memory of the source of self-information). “Psychologia Społeczna”, 8, 135-139.
 
35.
Paulhus, D.L. 1984. Two-component models of socially desirable responding. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 46, 598-609.
 
36.
Paulhus, D.L. 1986. Self-deception and impression management in test responses. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wiggins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaire, pp. 142–165. New York: Springer.
 
37.
Paulhus, D.L. 1989. Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR-6). Preliminary unpublished scale. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
 
38.
Paulhus, D.L., & Reid, D.B. 1991. Enhancement and denial in socially desirable responding. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 60(2), 307-317.
 
39.
Petrides, K.V. & Furnham, A. 2001. Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. “European Journal of Personality”, 15, 425-448.
 
40.
Preti, A., Vellante, M., Baron-Cohen, S., Zucca, G., Petretto, D. R., & Masala, C. 2011. The Empathy Quotient: A cross-cultural comparison of the Italian version. “Cognitive Neuropsychiatry”, 16, 50-70.
 
41.
Roth, D. L., Harris, R. N., & Snyder, C. R. 1988. An individual differences measure of attributive and repudiative tactics of favorable self-presentation. “Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology”, 6, 159-170.
 
42.
Sackeim, H. A., & Gur, R. C. 1978. Self-deception, self-confrontation, and consciousness. In G. E. Schwartz & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research, Vol. 2, pp. 139–197. New York: Plenum Press.
 
43.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. 1990. Emotional intelligence. “Imagination, Cognition & Personality”, 9, 185–211.
 
44.
Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. 2008. An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. “Psychological Review”, 115, 336–356.
 
45.
Seibt, B., & Förster, J. 2004. Stereotype threat and performance: How self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 87, 38-56.
 
46.
Shih, M., Ambady, N., Richeson, J. A., Fujita, K., & Gray, H. M. 2002. Stereotype performance boosts: The impact of self-relevance and the manner of stereotype activation. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 83, 638-647.
 
47.
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T.L. & Ho, G. C. 2011. Stereotype boost: Positive outcomes from the activation of positive stereotypes. In: M. Inzlicht & T. Shamder (eds.). Stereotype Threat: Theory, Process and Application, pp. 141-157. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 
48.
Simpson, J. A. & Campbell, L. 2016. Methods of evolutionary science. In: D. Buss (ed.) The handbook of evolutionary psychology, 2nd ed., vol. 1, pp. 115-135. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
 
49.
Steele, C. M. 1997. A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. “American Psychologist”, 52, 613–629.
 
50.
Steele, C. M., Aronson, J. 1995. Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 69, 797-811.
 
51.
Trent, N. L., Park, C., Bercovitz, K., & Chapman, I. M. 2016. Trait socio-cognitive mindfulness is related to affective and cognitive empathy. “Journal of Adult Development”, 23, 62-67.
 
52.
von Hippel, W., von Hippel, C., Conway, L., Preacher, K. J., Schooler, J. W., & Radvansky, G. A. 2005. Coping with stereotype threat: Denial as an impression management strategy. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 89, 22-35.
 
53.
Voracek, M., & Dressler, S. G. 2006. Lack of correlation between digit ratio (2D:4D) and Baron-Cohen's 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' test, empathy, systemising, and autism-spectrum quotients in a general population sample. “Personality and Individual Differences”, 41, 1481-1491.
 
54.
Wakabayashi, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Uchiyama, T., Yoshida, Y., Kuroda, M. & Wheelwright, S., 2007. Empathizing and systemizing in adults with and without Autism Spectrum Conditions: cross-cultural stability. “Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders”, 37, 1823-1832.
 
55.
Wheeler, S. C., & Petty, R. E. 2001. The effects of stereotype activation on behavior: A review of possible mechanisms. “Psychological Bulletin”, 127, 797-826.
 
56.
Wheelwright, S., Baron-Cohen, S., Goldenfeld, J., Delaney, D., Fine, R., Smith, L. & Wakabayashi, A. 2006. Predicting Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) from the Systemizing Quotient-Revised (SQ-R) and Empathy Quotient (EQ). “Brain Research”, 1079, 47-56.
 
57.
Wiggins, J. S. 1964. Convergences among stylistic response measures from objective personality tests. “Educational and Psychological Measurement”, 24, 551-562.
 
58.
Zeyer, A., Çetin‐Dindar, A., Md Zain, A. N., Juriševič, M., Devetak, I., & Odermatt, F. 2013. Systemizing: A cross-cultural constant for motivation to learn science. “Journal of Research in Science Teaching”, 50, 1047-1067.
 
59.
Zheng, L., & Zheng, Y. 2015. Sex and sexual orientation differences in empathizing-systemizing cognitive styles in China. “Personality and Individual Differences”, 87, 267-271.
 
ISSN:2084-3364