Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Early childhood gender socialization : subtitle implications of sex-typed toys and play on adulthood.. Rhodes, Katherine 2005

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
ubc_2005-0305.pdf [ 3.8MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0091959.json
JSON-LD: 1.0091959+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0091959.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0091959+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0091959+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0091959+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0091959 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0091959.txt
Citation
1.0091959.ris

Full Text

E A R L Y CHILDHOOD GENDER SOCIALIZATION: IMPLICATIONS OF SEX-TYPED TOYS AND PLAY O N ADULTHOOD CAREER  OUTCOMES  By  KATHERINE  RHODES  B . A . Psychology University o f British Columbia, 2002  M A S T E R OF ARTS In THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E  STUDIES  (FAMILY STUDIES)  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A  M a r c h 2005  © Katherine Rhodes, 2005  11 Abstract Sex-typed c h i l d h o o d toys are used as indicators o f parent-child gender socialization. Sex-typed toys indicate gender roles and expectations parents expose their y o u n g children to. T h e present study's purpose is to test whether early c h i l d h o o d gender socialization is related to adulthood academic, career and family expectations.  Gender role ideologies and  gender  schemas are hypothesized to mediate these relationships. T w o hundred and seventy-seven university students volunteered to complete surveys. The surveys measured the frequency o f play i n feminine and masculine toys and games, neutral toys, and w i t h each parent. dependent  variables measure  the  number  o f w o m e n enrolled i n respondents'  The  declared  university majors (specializations), as w e l l as their expected commitment to future occupation, parenting, marital, and home care roles. E x p e c t e d role commitments are measured using the L i f e R o l e Salience Scale ( A m a t e a et a l . , 1986). Gender role ideologies are measured b y using the short version o f the Attitudes T o w a r d s W o m e n Scale (Spence, H e l m r e i c h , & Stapp, 1973), and gender schemas are measured b y u s i n g B e r n ' s (1974) short v e r s i o n o f the B e r n Sex R o l e Inventory. The results o f the study found that exposure to sex-typed toys i n early c h i l d h o o d is related to expected commitment levels to future occupational, parenting, marital, and home care roles, as w e l l as to enrollment i n female dominated university majors. G e n d e r role ideologies and gender schemas mediate more o f the relationships tested i n the male sample than i n the female sample.  iii T a b l e o f Contents Abstract  »  List o f Tables  v  List o f Figures  vi  Introduction  2  Research Questions  3  T h e o r e t i c a l Issues o f G e n d e r S o c i a l i z a t i o n  3  Learning Theory  4  Gender Schema Theory  5  Theories in General  6  G e n d e r R e s e a r c h to D a t e  9  T o y s and P a r e n t a l Influences  11  The Importance o f Sex-typed Toys  12  Parental Influences  14  C a r e e r E x p e c t a t i o n s and U n i v e r s i t y S p e c i a l i z a t i o n s  18  Replication  22  Theoretical M o d e l  26  Hypotheses Methods  26 26  Dependent Variables  26  Independent V a r i a b l e s  27  Control Variables  29  Procedure  31  iv Data Analysis Results  32 33  Discussion  $g  Limitations  65  References  70  Appendix A  -75  Appendix B  gg  V  List of Tables 34 Table 1  J  Table 2  3  5  Table 3  3  8  39 Table 4...  J  Table 5  4  0  44 *  Table 6 Table 7  4  6  47 Table 8  H  49  Table 9 Table 10.  /  • •••  5  0  Table 11  5  2  Table 12  8  6  8  7  Table 15 13 Table 14  89 8  8  vi  List of Figures Figure 1  24  Figure 2  53  Figure 3  54  Figure 4  55  2 Introduction Despite  fluctuations  i n interest,  gender  research  has  been  a  popular  area  for  psychologists and sociologists, particularly i n the 1980's ( R u b l e & M a r t i n , 1998). A l l k n o w n societies have established gender roles through sex-typed labor divisions (Eagly, W o o d , & D i e k m a n , 2000), w h i c h makes this area universal and interesting to social scientists. The process o f learning and acquiring these sets o f social rules originates from the p r i m a r y social unit. A s parents are one o f the most influential agents o f social information for y o u n g children ( M a c c o b y , 1992; Schwartz & M a r k h a m , 1985), parents become a k e y socializing agent to gender development. The earliest example begins at birth, w h e n sons and daughters  are  subjected to differential sex socialization. Parents perceive their children differently a c c o r d i n g to the sex o f the c h i l d (Fagot & L e i n b a c h , 1987). Gender and sex-typed behaviors become observable i n children as y o u n g as 18 months ( O ' B r i e n & H u s t o n , 1985; C a l d e r a , H u s t o n , & O ' B r i e n , 1989; Fagot, 1974). The family context provides children w i t h the earliest sex role socialization (Fagot & L e i n b a c h , 1987), and is thus a popular focal point o f gender research. T o y s are used b y parents and children to learn about gender rules and expectations. T o y s have been used i n many studies to indicate h o w children learn gender (e.g., G i u l i a n o , Popp, & Knight, 2000; O ' B r i e n Pasternack,  & H u s t o n , 1985; Eisenberg, W o l c h i c k , Hernandez,  &  1985; L a n g l o i s & D o w n s , 1980; R o o p n a r i n e , 1986; F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n , 1993).  M u c h research has been implemented to assess the process o f h o w gender socialization occurs through the encouragement  o f sex-typed toy play, but some questions still remain. These  questions ask what the importance o f this vast b o d y o f research is, and what the outcomes o f variations i n this process mean for individuals. One significant effect o f c h i l d h o o d gender socialization is that w o m e n w h o p l a y e d with masculine toys as children are more l i k e l y to be athletic. G i u l i a n o , et a l . (2000) conducted a study that analyzed what toys and p l a y groups  3 female athletes and non-athletes were exposed to i n childhood.  T h e y found that, c o m p a r e d to  female non-athletes, female athletes were more likely to have p l a y e d w i t h masculine toys, and to have had support and encouragement from peers and siblings. The findings o f this study describe h o w childhood gender socialization can influence adult outcomes. T h e G i u l i a n o et a l . (2000) study outcomes indicate the importance o f gender socialization i n c h i l d h o o d through the use o f toys is a topic needing further research.  Research Questions The  purpose o f this study is to examine what the possible adulthood outcomes o f  c h i l d h o o d gender socialization are. The questions for this study are as follows: D o childhood sex-typed toys affect  career or academic choices? D o e s the sex o f p l a y groups i n c h i l d h o o d  predict these choices i n adulthood? D o e s parent-child p l a y predict academic and  career  choices? Is this process mediated b y gender schemas o r gender ideologies? These research questions w i l l be tested i n this study i n order to assess the possible outcomes o f parent-child gender socialization. T h e p r o p o s e d research w i l l examine h o w social indicators o f parent-child gender socialization can be linked to gender specific outcomes i n adulthood. T o y s , p l a y groups, and parental play i n early childhood w i l l be the indicators o f gender socialization. U n i v e r s i t y majors and career expectations w i l l be the adulthood outcomes. T h e f o l l o w i n g sections w i l l discuss the theoretical issues behind this research, the past research, and the research methods. Theoretical Issues o f G e n d e r Socialization M a n y theories have been applied and developed to guide gender socialization research. H o w e v e r , many o f these theories apply only to certain areas o f gender development, as no theory thus far can account for the entire developmental process (Fagot & L e i n b a c h , 1989). Theories from where the research questions are rooted w i l l be discussed i n the next section.  4 These theories focus o n parental gender socialization and its impact on later life outcomes, such as career choices.  Learning Theory L e a r n i n g theory can be used to explain h o w individuals learn gender. T h e assumptions o f learning theory postulate that we learn gender appropriate, or sex-typed, behaviors and roles through punishments and rewards (Ruble & M a r t i n , 1998; Bern, 1983, 1981). R e w a r d s and punishments i n this paradigm must be conceptualized i n the social context; such responses to sex-typed behaviors, whether congruent or incongruent w i t h the i n d i v i d u a l ' s sex, c a n range from facial expressions, to involvement o f play, to verbal cues (Roopnarine, 1986; L a n g l o i s & D o w n s , 1980). C h i l d r e n imitate sex-typed behaviors that parents, or other authority figures, m o d e l (Ruble & M a r t i n , 1998). A s an example, i f a female c h i l d chose to play w i t h a d o l l , or any other feminine-typed toy, this behavior w o u l d be met w i t h positive reactions. A n y other congruent sex-typed play w o u l d also receive positive reactions. H o w e v e r , should this same female c h i l d play w i t h a masculine toy, parents and others w o u l d frown, state their disapproval, or engage i n another form o f social punishment. A l t h o u g h this theory identifies the sources o f gender information, social learning theory implies that children are relatively inactive participants i n the socialization process (Bern, 1983). Parents are seen as the information providers and modelers, while children are simply absorbing gender information. M a n y studies that apply this inactive assumption to observe the process o f parental socialization o n y o u n g children forget that gender socialization is a process, not a sequence. F o r example, Fagot and H a g a n (1991) observed parent-child toy selections and coded  video recordings o f children's selections, f o l l o w e d b y parents' reactions (rewards and  punishments). This sequence o f events assumes that the process ends w h e n a parent reacts. This sequence omits the possibility that children m a y be observing the parents' reactions w h i l e  5 m a k i n g the toy selection i n the form o f social referencing. In assuming that children are not engaging i n social referencing, children appear to be unmotivated to seek gender information. Although  social  learning theory  is used  i n many infancy and early c h i l d h o o d gender  socialization studies (e.g., Fagot & H a g a n , 1991), it fails to explain w h y gender information is so readily processed, w h y gender is the first and largest categorical system that children learn, or i f factors affect gender development b e y o n d early c h i l d h o o d and into adulthood. T h i s theory does not account for the variation i n children's gender development, and arguably not w i t h i n multi-sibling families. Despite these issues, social learning theory has been an important paradigm to assess the gender socialization o f infants and y o u n g children.  Gender Schema Theory G e n d e r schemas are the networks that contain gender and gender-related information (Ruble & M a r t i n , 1998; Bern, 1981). Gender schemas help to seek out information related to gender and organize n e w information to be related to gender (Bern, 1981).  Sex typing is  created from individual gender-schematic processing capabilities o f organizing information into gender categories (Bern, 1983; Roopnarine & M o u n t , 1987). T h e focus o n individual abilities a l l o w s for variations i n gender development. This can explain w h y siblings can have v a r y i n g levels o f masculinity and femininity, even though they grew up i n the same family environment. G e n d e r schema theory assumes that appropriate sex-typed norms come from the surrounding social environment, w h i c h acknowledges the learning processes  involved in  gender development (Bern, 1983). Parents create the social environment for their infants and y o u n g children, b y p r o v i d i n g gender developing  gender  schemas  to  information to them.  understand  and  organize  C h i l d r e n learn to use information.  Societal  their  gender  expectations give children sex-typed information they w i l l i n turn relate to their o w n sense o f gender, w h i c h is also related to their self concept (Bem^ 1983). C h i l d r e n w i l l learn information  6 relevant to their o w n gender prior to information o f the opposite gender. G i r l s possess schemas w i t h greater female k n o w l e d g e , and boys w i l l h o l d more masculine k n o w l e d g e ( L e v y , 1999). T h e cognitive and learning elements o f gender schema theory combine the concepts o f learning and cognitive development theories to create a more comprehensive theory that applies to more areas o f gender development. This theory explains h o w and w h y children learn from the gender related information p r o v i d e d b y their family. A s gender schema theory is a theory o f process (Bern, 1983), it can be critiqued for its lack o f accounting for the content o f schemas. H o w e v e r , the l a c k o f content description explains differences i n gender development within families and across social definitions o f gender. The accumulation o f gender-related information c a n be explained, but the gender information cannot be. G e n d e r schema theory also fails to explain w h e n , or i f the process o f gender schema development is completed. The flexibility  o f gender schemas is also not explained. G e n d e r schema theory does not e x p l a i n i f  gender schemas change over time, or i f there is a point at w h i c h they are completed. This theory does not say whether gender schemas receive information throughout the life course that continues to shape them.  Theories in General L e a r n i n g theory and gender schema theory are only t w o perspectives o n gender. T h e concept o f gender is a c o m p l e x topic for social research, where many perspectives and theories have tried to study its many facets. C o n n e l l (1995) describes the complexity o f studying masculinity (and gender) i n s o c i a l research a n d discusses the rationale that masculinity exists only where femininity exists. T h e idea that each gender must exist in order for the concept to be real adds to the c o m p l e x i t y o f the concept, as not a l l perspectives v i e w masculinity and femininity as being polar opposites. F o r example, E a g l y (1987) argues that the maintenance o f sex differences depends o n gender roles, that are o c c u p i e d strongly b y one o f the sexes. T h e  7 gender roles serve as a guideline for what type o f employment, social role, and status either sex should hold. G e n d e r roles are not necessarily v i e w e d as being opposite from one another, but masculine and feminine roles must exist together i n order for gender roles to be a v a l i d concept. C o n n e l l (1995) describes four m a i n areas o f thought for where most o f the gender perspectives can be categorized into. Essentialism focuses o n one aspect o f the definition o f masculinity and defines male life i n terms o f that definition only. These perspectives are too vague to applied to the process o f gender socialization. P o s i t i v i s m relies o n the factual findings o f social research to define masculinity and femininity i n order to describe h o w m e n and w o m e n are. T h i s perspective relies on scales and statistics that allow for the concept o f gender to be quantified. G e n d e r schema theory falls into this category, as gender is assumed to be relative i n terms o f the quantity o f masculine and feminine traits the individual holds. L e a r n i n g theory can also be quantified b y measuring gender role ideologies, but also relies o n normative definitions o f gender roles. N o r m a t i v e perspectives interpret gender difference i n terms o f h o w each gender should behave ( C o n n e l l , 1995). The assumptions o f learning theory fall into this category, where children learn what gender roles are appropriate for themselves as w e l l as for others. T h e fourth perspective, k n o w n as the semiotic perspective, defines one gender i n terms o f not being the other gender; the symbolic differences between the genders are compared i n contrast to the other. C o n n e l l ' s (1995) categorization o f gender perspectives demonstrates that there are many theories surrounding gender, however, these perspectives emphasize different aspects o f the concept. There are many theories that are applied to gender research, h o w e v e r they do not explain the process o f acquiring gender i n early c h i l d h o o d , and h o w this process affects o n e ' s gender i n adulthood. Tajfel and T u r n e r ' s (1978) social  identity theory posits that individuals  8 within a social group w i l l act and behave as other members o f that group do. Individuals are assessed based o n h o w they identify w i t h a social category.  F r o m this perspective, being a  m a n w o u l d cause m e n to act and behave i n similar fashions that other m e n do ( R u b l e & M a r t i n , 1998). This theory explains the learning o f gender i n broad and general terms, but takes on a macro-level explanation o f h o w gender exists, instead o f explaining the specific parentc h i l d gender socialization process. This theory also does not explain h o w differences o f gender exist within a group. F o r example, i n a group o f adult w o m e n , w h y do some  describe  themselves as being more 'feminine' than other members o f the group? A n o t h e r contextual theory that does not explain the process o f acquiring gender information is the situation-based context perspective. This perspective v i e w s the context o f the situation as an important contributor to the development o f gender. W e s t and Z i m m e r m a n (1987) explain that gender is something that is " d o n e " and expressed through actions, such as behavior, speech, and thought.  D o i n g gender is a theory  that can only be applied to those w h o already have an individual sense o f their gender, and cannot be used to explain the process o f gender learning or processing. T h i s perspective is not applicable to early c h i l d h o o d socialization where children do not have a sense o f what gender is. Some theories, such as evolutionary schools o f thought,  base their understanding o f  masculinity and femininity on the reproductive restraints that men and w o m e n hold (Ruble & Martin,  1998). These theories argue that gender roles originate from these reproductive  differences. These theories ignore the social factors that influence the development o f gender through socialization, and do not take into consideration the evolution o f gender  roles  themselves. G e n d e r is a complex and vast concept that is not only debatable i n definition, but also i n the use o f the concept i n research. There are many more theories and perspectives on gender  9 w h i c h can be applied to specific areas o f the development o f gender. L e a r n i n g theory and gender schema theory are t w o competing theories i n the paradigm o f early c h i l d h o o d gender socialization, and are appropriately applied to the research questions i n this study. Past research has used these theories i n this area o f study, and w i l l thus be u s e d i n this present study. G i v e n the complicated nature o f gender, and the many w a y s o f defining and measuring the concept, it is clear that a l l facets w i l l not be able to be included i n this study. The idea that gender is a socially constructed concept is an assumption that holds for m a n y o f the social theories discussed, and w i l l be an assumption i n this study. This means that any b i o l o g i c a l influences w i l l not be tested. G e n d e r R e s e a r c h to Date A l t h o u g h there have been some changes i n the distinctions between sex and gender, for this discussion, gender w i l l be defined as the amount o f masculine and feminine characteristics, including preferences, behaviors, and aspirations. M a s c u l i n e characteristics are the attributes that social norms deem to be appropriate for males and feminine characteristics are  the  attributes deemed appropriate for females. Sex w i l l be defined as the b i o l o g i c a l classification that is used to distinguish males  from  females, characterized b y sex organs. Sex-typed  behaviors are actions congruent w i t h either masculine or feminine characteristics. F o r example, putting o n makeup is considered to be a feminine sex-typed behavior, and fixing a car is considered to be a masculine sex-typed behavior. G e n d e r has been distinguished from " s e x " i n that it develops through social a n d cultural processes, and is thus an acquired description, rather than biologically detemiined ( W e s t & Z i m m e r m a n , 1987). H o w e v e r ,  from  infancy, biological sex determines h o w parents,  and  others, w i l l react to us as children and adults (Fagot & L e i n b a c h , 1987; Pomerleau, B o l d u c , M a l c u i t & Cossette, 1990).  F o r example, parental personality expectations for daughters are  10 different from those h e l d for their sons ( M a c c o b y & J a c k l i n , 1974). R e s e a r c h continues to support the idea that parents assume their children are predisposed to developing sex-typed characteristics. Parents i n turn respond to the sex o f infants in sex-typed manners a c c o r d i n g to the infant's sex (Pomerleau et a l . , 1990). Parents and others must hold certain gender related assumptions i n order to provide appropriate gender information to children. A s parents usually provide the most care for their infants, they become the largest source o f social information to their children. C h i l d r e n learn gender roles f r o m the sex-typed behaviors  that parents m o d e l (Schwartz &  M a r k h a m , 1985). Parents  model  sex-typed  behaviors through implicit and explicit demonstrations. E x p l i c i t m o d e l i n g occurs i n such w a y s as w h e n parents v o c a l i z e what is appropriate  for girls and boys. S u c h explicit  gender  information reflects the gender expectations that parents h o l d and practice. F o r example, traditional parents engage i n orating stories w i t h achievement themes tied to masculinity; these themes are reflective o f parents' gender expectations for masculine roles  (Fiese & S k i l l m a n ,  2000). Implicit m o d e l i n g occurs w h e n parents do not directly communicate ideas o f gender. F o r example, parents c a n display their gender ideologies w i t h daily routines such as driving. W h e n the father drives the car and the mother sits i n the passenger seat, gender i n this context is modeled implicitly. These sex-typed roles that are learned from parental models are assumed b y researchers i n tins area to be used and displayed i n social contexts outside the family context ( L i n d s e y & M i z e , 2001). C h i l d r e n ' s bedrooms are an important gender r i c h environment parents create. H o m e s have been found to have children's bedrooms containing sex-typed colors, clothing (Pomerleau et a l . , 1990), and toys ( O ' B r i e n & H u s t o n , 1985). B y surrounding children's bedrooms w i t h information regarding their gender, girls develop interests i n feminine items, and boys i n masculine items. Parents assume that their daughters are predisposed to appropriate sex-typed  11 behaviors. This assumption becomes a logical explanation for the parents to account for their daughters' interests i n the color pink, rather than to assume the responsibility for creating the feminized environment o f a pink b e d r o o m filled w i t h pink bears and B a r b i e dolls. H o w e v e r , it cannot be assumed that infant bedrooms are the only gender environments that parents create for their children.  Toys and Parental Influences R e s e a r c h i n the area o f parent-child gender socialization has relied heavily on toys as a measure o f both parental gender roles and expectations, and o f children's gender development. Toys  o c c u p y a large amount  o f time i n c h i l d r e n ' s lives and are  important to  gender  socialization. Parents can interact w i t h their children i n the form o f play, w h i c h c a n also involve the use o f toys. This interaction provides children w i t h messages regarding w h i c h behaviors are appropriate for their gender. C h i l d r e n are discouraged to engage in cross gender p l a y and w i t h cross gender toys; parents encourage their children to play w i t h toys that are congruent w i t h their sex (Fisher-Thompson, 1990), and to play i n congruent sex-typed play styles ( L i n d s e y & M i z e , 2001). Parents provide social information that w i l l guide their children's toy selections  Important Ages The majority o f research i n the parent-child gender socialization i n the play context l o o k s at children as y o u n g as 12 months o l d . I n a longitudinal study, Fagot and H a g a n (1991) found  18 months was the age at w h i c h parents used the most rewards and punishments,  compared to other age groups i n their longitudinal study. T h e y argue that parents feel a need to educate their children at 18 months o f age regarding the appropriate social norms o f their society.  B y 3 V years o f age, children c a n make sex appropriate play decisions and toy 2  selections i n peer interaction settings where parents are not influencing the children (Fagot &  12  Leinbach, 1987). Subsequently, Fagot and Hagan (1991) found that parents displayed fewer reactions to the appropriateness of sex-typed play for their 5 year-old children, compared to when their children were 18 months old. Fagot and Huston (1991) argue that the decrease of attention to sex-typed play guidance through rewards and punishments is no longer required at this age. Children should have learned the basic gender rules and be able to maintain them. The Importance of Sex-Typed Toys  Given the research on toy selections and play styles presented, the question remains: why are toy and gender related researchfindingsimportant? In order to answer this question, sex-typed toys must properly be defined and understood. Masculine toys are what a given set of social norms rules as being appropriate for boys to play with, and vice versa for girls' toys. Guns, army toys, weapons, football uniforms and cards, airplanes, vehicles (cars, trucks, trains), sports balls, weight lifting gear, and tools are examples of toys that past research has found to be masculine toys; jewelry boxes, dolls and soft dolls, sewing kits, kitchen gadgets, hair dryers and telephones are feminine toys (Fisher-Thompson, 1990; Idle et al., 1993). Upon closer analysis of the common sex-typed toys in this list, it becomes apparent that masculine toys promote spatial movement. Sparfkin, Serbin, Denier and Connor (1983) summarized research findings that provided strong evidence that children who play more often with masculine toys outperform on various spatial tests children who play most often with feminine toys. Trucks (mobile toys) allow children to utilize their play space to its full extent and have been found to elicit the greatest amount of movement (Liss, 1983), just as sports equipment promotes physical movement of the entire body. Feminine toys promote domestic and imaginative play; dolls are the only toys that elicit nurturing play (Liss, 1983). The majority of feminine toys do not take children's imaginations beyond the domestic paradigm. While feminine toys do not encourage  13 spatial abilities, tbey teach girls about traditional female roles. A s children are learning about what toys are appropriate for them to play w i t h , their gender schemas are b e c o m i n g more concrete. Parents w i l l control w h i c h toys children have access to, and these toys help to shape and become a part o f children's gender schemas. C h i l d r e n w i l l develop a sense o f femininity or masculinity from their toy exposure, and the toys w i l l become recognized as congruent w i t h their o w n gender schemas. B o t h learning and gender schema theories c a n argue what role toys have i n the development o f gender i n childhood. H o w e v e r , it is not clear i f gender schemas or ideologies o f these theories mediate adulthood outcomes from these early gender experiences. M a s c u l i n e toys i n girls' lives have been found b y G i u l i a n o et al.'s (2000) study to be related to adult outcomes o f athletic abilities. W h e n female athletes and non-athletes  were  asked to give retrospective accounts o f their play styles and toys from their c h i l d h o o d , the female athletes were found to have had more access to masculine toys. P l a y i n g w i t h masculine toys  was  related  to  personal  athletic  confidence,  orientations  towards  winning,  and  competitiveness. The encouragement these female athletes were receiving i n their c h i l d h o o d indicates that encouragement i n sports participation (sports usually being masculine) affected their athletic careers.  G i u l i a n o et al. (2000) also found that w o m e n w h o p l a y e d w i t h masculine  toys and participated i n male play groups were more likely to become varsity athletes.  The  results o f this study provide support for the argument that masculine toys and p l a y groups affect  specific developmental outcomes. The implications o f the sex o f p l a y groups  are  important considerations w h e n assessing later life choices. T h e findings that relate masculine toy  play i n early c h i l d h o o d athletic careers compared to non-athletes make this study an  important element to the proposed research. The strong relationships that G i u l i a n o et a l . (2000) found w i t h masculine toys i s evidence that toys a n d p l a y groups have a significant effect i n the process o f gender socialization. The findings o f this study are crucial w h e n considering the  14 research on gender socialization w i t h sex-typed toys. A l t h o u g h G i u l i a n o et a l . (2000) were measuring concepts related to athleticism, the relations between c h i l d h o o d toys and p l a y groups to adulthood suggest that toys m a y affect other adulthood outcomes. F o r example, career expectations and post-secondary fields o f study c o u l d be mediated b y c h i l d h o o d gender socialization. It is also unclear as to whether gender role ideologies or gender schemas are mediating factors i n this process. The past research o n the parent-child gender socialization process through the use o f toys has failed to l o o k b e y o n d the childhood stage and to assess the implications and outcomes o f this socialization.  Parental Influences Rewards and Punishments. F a c i a l  expressions  that  parents  display  upon  the  presentation o f toys have been found to be a mechanism that parents use to socialize gender i n their y o u n g children.  T w e l v e month o l d b o y s receive more positive reactions to masculine  play, and negative assertive behaviors, while mothers give more positive reactions to twelve month o l d  girls w h o p l a y e d w i t h feminine toys than d i d fathers (Fagot & H a g a n , 1991).  C a l d e r a , H u s t o n and O ' B r i e n (1989) found that w h e n parent-child dyads were presented w i t h toys i n a laboratory setting, both parents and children exhibited excited facial expressions i f the toy w a s consistent w i t h their o w n sex. T o y s that were inconsistent w i t h the sex o f the parent were received w i t h less excitement, especially for fathers. These same parents responded verbally to  feminine toys w i t h more teaching and praise, while masculine toys elicited more  animated sounds and negative comments. C a l d e r a et a l . ' s (1989) and F a g o t a n d H a g a n ' s (1991) studies demonstrate h o w toys are used as tools o f gender socialization b y parents. H o w e v e r , they do not i m p l y that parents are consciously aware o f the information p r o v i d e d i n their reactions to toys. Parental Toy Influences. Parents are most l i k e l y not aware o f h o w they are reacting to  15 their children and their toys. Fagot's (1974) study had three of their twelve family sample show displeasure and upset when asked about their own sex differences in reaction to girls' and boys' play. One would assume such attitudes would predict a less traditional pattern of gender socialization from these parents, however, Fagot (1974) found that the 12 to 18 month old children of these parents did not behave and play differently than the other children of the same sex in the study. Although these parents were distraught at the idea of differential treatment of boys in girls, they were not aware that they were engaging in it. The evidence of parent-child toy play may appear to imply that the child plays a very inactive part in the toy selection process. The learning process requires those around the infant to provide information, sometimes in the form of a toy. Children have been found to accept toys from their parents almost all the time (Idle et al., 1993). The lack of opposition to parental toy selection reiterates the parental socialization influences; children are highly accepting of what parents offer them. Even for children who do not accept a toy selected by their parents, children are still likely to consider the toy, and are extremely unlikely to reject the toy (Idle et al., 1993). This occurrence illustrates the impact that parents have on sex-typed toy preferences, as children are highly likely to accept the toys their parents provide them with. Parents are the primary toy purchasers for their children (Fisher-Thompson, 1993). However, external influences on which toys children prefer must be considered. For example, children receive toys as a gifts from relatives and family friends. Toys as gifts were just as likely to be sex-typed as non-sex-typed when people outside of the immediate family were providing them. Most of the toys that are received as gifts from parents are usually sex-typed, especially if they are requested by the child (Fisher-Thompson, 1993). However, in the event of a cross gender toy being received, the parent is still able to control the gender socialization process. As mentioned previously, parents' reactions to toys guide the toy selections of the  16 child. Fagot and H a g a n (1991) found that parents w o u l d react after a toy w a s selected b y the c h i l d ; this reaction acts as a reference to w h i c h toys are thought to be appropriate. A cross gender toy that is given to a c h i l d w o u l d be met w i t h the same negative reactions as d i d a l l other cross gender toy presentation studies found.  Gender of the Parent. M o t h e r s and fathers have different gender expectations for their children. The sex o f the parent has implications o n the gender socialization o f their children. Fagot (1974) found that fathers generally identify more activities as b e i n g sex appropriate than mothers do.  In play situations, fathers spend equal amounts o f time playing w i t h masculine  and neutral toys, whereas mothers spend more time w i t h neutral toys ( C a l d e r a et a l . , 1989). W h e n r a n k i n g toys along a desirability scale, fathers and men were found to give the highest (and extreme) ratings to masculine toys, and the lowest ratings to fennnine toys (Idle et a l . , 1993; Fisher T h o m p s o n , 1990).  Idle et a l . , (1993) found that mothers h a d similar ratings as  fathers, while F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n (1990) found that female subjects considered more toys as neutral, rather than sex-typed. Preferences t o w a r d certain toys should also indicate what types o f toys parents w o u l d want to use i n play w i t h their children. Fathers also engage i n more p h y s i c a l play w i t h their sons, w h i l e mothers do not s h o w any differences i n physical play w i t h sons or daughters (Lindsey & M i z e , 2001). These sex differences  parents  exhibit demonstrate  h o w fathers  a n d mothers assert their gender b y  displaying, or doing, sex-typed behaviors. Fagot and H a g a n ' s (1991) male subjects gave the least amount o f positive reactions to cross sex play to their 18-month o l d sons, w h i l e mothers made n o distinction. Parents overall gave more positive responses to sons w h o w e r e engaging i n masculine-typed play. W h e n selecting toys as gifts, males are more likely to purchase sextyped toys than non-sex-typed toys, especially w h e n b u y i n g for children other than their o w n (Fisher-Thompson,  1993). These findings suggest that fathers provide and display more  17 stereotypical masculine gender information to sons. Fathers hold stronger gender stereotypes than mothers, and thus, give more sex-typed messages to their sons. In contrast, daughters appear to be receiving more neutral than sex-typed messages, compared to the sex-typed information that sons receive overall. Men appear to display their gender through interacting with children in sex-typed manners (e.g., toys purchasing, play styles), especially with their sons, indicating that men receive more social rewards for their gender appropriate behavior Context of Gender and Sex-typed Toys. The context of social interaction is also important to the socialization process. Parents can define the context in terms of gender appropriateness by choosing when to interact with their children (Lindsey & Mize, 2001). Research in the area of parent-child toy selection has found that associative play and activities are valid measures of positive social interaction (e.g., Fagot & Hagan, 1991). As an example, when a father asks a son to help fix the family car, he is choosing the context of interaction outside of the house to teach his son a new skill. If the father does not interact with his son on the same level inside the house doing domestic work, the father has defined auto mechanics as a masculine context. Lindsey and Mize (2001) found that parents were more likely to choose to engage in pretense play (a form of play that involves using objects to represent other objects) with daughters, while choosing to engage in physical play with their sons more often than any other form of play. Parents in these contexts were teaching their cliildren how certain types of play styles are more appropriate for girls or for boys. Toys in these play situations are also used by parents to define sex-typed play styles, as well as to indicate which toys are meant for boys, and which are meant for girls. Children learn a large amount about gender from their toys (Schwartz & Markham, 1985). Idle, Wood, and Desmarais (1993) found that fathers in play situations with their children would choose to spend more time with toys that were masculine typed, while mothers chose neutral toys. These findings exemplify how parents create sex-  18 typed contexts for learning. H o w e v e r , both the sex-typed  contextual and environmental  influences that parents create for their children may be very detailed and meticulously researched,  but the  questions  pertaining to the effects  and outcomes  o f v a r y i n g gender  socialization must be addressed. Questions or studies pertaining to the importance o f gender information i n early c h i l d h o o d must be addressed i n order to validate the importance o f these studies.  Career Expectations and University Specializations Career expectations  are  also affected  b y gender.  Gender roles and  gender  role  expectations appear to influence career paths that are taken. For example, w o m e n w h o place high salience on personal and family life, compared to those w o m e n w h o d i d not, have been found to be less l i k e l y to choose the sciences as university specializations ( W a r e & L e e , 1988). H o w e v e r , mathematically oriented university majors ( w h i c h are male dominated) for m e n are positively related to personal and future familial obligations ( W a r e & L e e , 1988). This gender difference suggests that perhaps male dominated domains o f study are helpful i n pursuing full time careers that require, or are thought to require, a higher priority over family obligations.  B o t h male and female college students report equal desire for having children at some point i n their lives (Schroeder, B l o o d , & M a l u s o , 1993). H o w e v e r , male and female careers offer different paths; female career paths usually entail considering time o f f for rearing and raising children. A de-emphasis o n familial responsibilities w o u l d deter traditional females from pursuing such fields o f study. Jackson, Gardner, and Sullivan (1992) found that o n average w o m e n , compared to men, expect to take more time o f f from their careers i n order to focus o n c h i l d care. These w o m e n reported they expected an average o f 3 years a w a y from their p a i d w o r k , w h i l e men only predicted 1 year a w a y from their j o b s . F a m i l y related gender  19  differences also exist within the careers themselves. Women have reported that accommodating jobs to family life and development opportunities are more important than men perceive to be (Jackson et al., 1992). While both men and women want to have children, women tend to face more career interruptions to accommodate these responsibilities. Men who pursue masculine careers are more interested in extrinsic job features, such as money, little supervision, leadership and prestige; women are concerned with intrinsic features such as creativity, working with people, and steady progression (Lyson, 1984). Women have reported that they want both a career and a traditional family life (Schroeder et al.,1993), which is more attainable through intrinsic careers. Since intrinsic careers are not as focused on independence and leadership, they are easier to leave and to return to. The features of intrinsic careers allow women to accommodate their familial goals. Despite the desire to have a career that accommodates child rearing, undergraduate women assume that they will endure more role frustration when they become parents, compared to the levels of role frustration men predicted their future wives would face (Schroeder et al., 1993). Although women are preparing for maternal roles by choosing careers that accommodate this desire, they are still aware that this could conflict with their career goals. Family Influences. The influence of the gender role expectations of female social and familial responsibilities may be linked to the gender socialization process. According to Lewko et al. (1993), family support and encouragement predicted daughters enrolling in science specializations, while internal factors, such as motivation, predicted male participation in the sciences. This study indicates that careers in scientific domains are expected to be filled by males, who rely on their own motivation to seek these careers. Women must be socialized through family encouragement and away from traditional female roles to choose masculine  20 fields. Fathers appear to have a large influence i n this process. T i l l e c z e k and L e w k o (2001) found that females whose fathers were e m p l o y e d i n the sciences were 3.5 times more l i k e l y than other females to pursue science careers themselves. M a t e r n a l science occupations d i d not predict daughters'  science specializations. H o w e v e r , h a v i n g a mother w h o was e m p l o y e d  predicts more egalitarian attitudes towards parenting roles (Schroeder et a l . , 1993). These findings reiterate the amount o f influence that fathers have over the gender socialization and career  choices o f their children. A l t h o u g h these fathers  were e m p l o y e d i n traditionally  masculine fields where the mothers were not, family support, as indicated b y L e w k o et a l . (1993), influences female participation i n male dominated careers. I n the past, families were less likely to pay for their daughters to go to post-secondary institutions, and then i n the late 1980's, were less likely to provide computer training for their daughters ( E c c l e s , 1987). In these instances, parents were using their gender ideologies to guide their behaviors i n relation to their daughter's education careers, and steer them a w a y from non-traditional careers. I n doing this, traditional roles, such as motherhood, are emphasized.  Application of Theory. B o t h gender schemas and gender ideologies are important factors i n sex-typed career decisions. E c c l e s ' (1987) literature r e v i e w describes h o w specific elements o f these theories account for many variables i n career decisions for m e n and w o m e n . F o r example, the perception o f available fields o f study and employment are influenced b y individual gender schemas. W h i l e some career options m a y not be considered due to being unaware o f their existence, many options simply do not fit into individuals' gender schemas, and are therefore not considered w h e n a d e c i s i o n is made. W h e n a career or academic option matches their gender schema, individuals w i l l consider these options. C o n v e r s e l y , gender roles affect career choices b y influencing perceptions o f careers. E c c l e s (1987) reported that gender role socialization has a negative effect o n w o m e n ' s confidence i n their abilities compared to  21 m e n ' s confidence. This confidence deficit leads w o m e n to feel the need to w o r k harder i n order to attain similar career goals that m e n have. Perceptions o f success are important variables, as they predict levels o f performance. G e n d e r role socialization was also reported b y E c c l e s (1987) to impose different personal priorities on career decisions. W o m e n are more l i k e l y to prioritize children over careers than men. Some individuals choose career fields that are not considered to be gender appropriate. F o r example, w h e n a w o m a n decides to enter into mechanical engineering, or w h e n a m a n decides to enroll i n nursing i n university, these sex-typed choices are incongruent w i t h the individuals' behaviors. L y s o n (1984) found that m e n and w o m e n w h o pursue fields mat are incongruent w i t h their sex h o l d w o r k value orientations that fall between those o f traditional men and w o m e n . H o w e v e r , the m e n and w o m e n i n the fields that are incongruent w i t h their sexes were more similar i n attitudes to traditional m e n and w o m e n , compared to each other. In other w o r d s , w o m e n i n non-traditional fields have similar values as traditional w o m e n . W o m e n i n non-traditional fields do not have similar attitudes to m e n i n non-traditional fields. M e n and w o m e n i n non-traditional areas o f study and w o r k still h o l d more traditional values. I n this instance, gender schemas might mediate the career and field decisions that are being made. The non-traditional careers might be congruent w i t h their gender schemas, but their gender role ideologies c o u l d be more traditional. I f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s gender schema is more similar to a career that is not congruent with their gender, the w o r k value orientations are accounted for b y their traditional gender role ideologies. F r o m these examples, it is unclear whether  gender  schemas or gender role ideologies mediate career decisions. In relation to the toy research, the questions that remain ask whether toys i n early c h i l d h o o d are true predictors o f later life career choices, such as university specializations. L e a r n i n g theory w o u l d hypothesize that children learn career and academic gender roles from  22 their parents. F o r example, w h e n a daughter's academic performance is equal i n math and E n g l i s h , parents w i l l still assume that her academic performance i n E n g l i s h exceeds  her  performance i n math ( E c c l e s , 1987). Parents socialize their children through the assumptions o f their o w n gender role ideologies. These gender roles should predict w h i c h university majors students register i n . In contrast, gender schema theory w o u l d argue that university and career choices  are  reflections  o f i n d i v i d u a l ' s masculinity or  femininity. Regardless  of  which  theoretical perspective mediates career decisions, the gendered environments that parents provide i n early c h i l d h o o d need further examination. The toys and play styles that parents controlled i n c h i l d h o o d are important elements o f the process o f gender formation. C a r e e r choices are l i k e l y to be predicted b y the sex-typed nature o f c h i l d h o o d toys and play environments. The path that leads to career decisions is as follows: parents socialize gender i n their children i n early c h i l d h o o d through toys and play; children learn gender ideologies and create their individual gender schemas; i n adulthood, career and educational choices are reflections o f gender ideologies or gender schemas that were learned and created i n c h i l d h o o d . Replication The majority o f the cited research on parental gender socialization w i t h the use o f toys and play is over fifteen years o l d . T h e research designs and findings o f these study are still important contributions to this field o f research. H o w e v e r , as gender ideologies towards female and family roles change over time, these studies are i n need o f replication and re-evaluation. T h e proposed research combines the findings o f the parent-child toy studies w i t h the E c c l e s ' (1987) r e v i e w findings. This study is guided b y the findings on gender role and gender schema influences o n career and adulthood outcomes. Theoretical M o d e l Figure 1 is an illustration o f the models that represent the relationships between early  23 childhood gender influences and the type of university major that has been declared. The outcome variable in model one is defined as the percentage of female students enrolled in the declared major. The more females that are enrolled in the declared fields indicate feminine academic fields, and lower female enrollment indicates higher masculine fields of study. The previously discussed research has indicated that parents create gender environments for their children through toys, play groups, and reactions to their children's behaviors. These components of children's gendered environments serve as indicators of parental gender and gender role expectations for their children. All together, these are considered as the independent variables in both models. However, with the abundance of research done in this field, the question remains, does this phenomenon have any influence on children beyond childhood? And specifically, do the gender messages learned in childhood influence later life behaviors? As Giuliano et al. (2000) found, predictors of athleticism and confidence included sex of play groups and toys. However, no research so far has found whether or not academic and career choices are influenced or predicted by early childhood gender socialization. For these reasons, the outcome variables in model tow are career expectations and university specializations. The models in Figure 1 illustrate the hypothesis that there is a connection or relationship between parental gender socialization through play media, and later life decisions, such as career expectations and academic fields of study. For example, for those children that do play with masculine toys more often, are they more likely to choose masculine university majors?. Would they also be more likely to assume a masculine role in work and family life? And do femmine toys predict the opposite? The models in Figure 1.0 illustrate the direction of these proposed relationships. Model 1 predicts the path that links early childhood gender socialization to declared specializations. This model is testing whether the theories can explain the relationships to the  24 Figure  I. Models 1 and 2 of Hypothesized Relationships.  G e n d e r R o l e Ideologies  Parent-child G e n d e r  •>  U n i v e r s i t y Specializations  Socialization  Gender Schemas  Gender R o l e Ideologies  Occupational R o l e Commitment  arental R o l e Commitment P a r e n t - C h i l d Gender Socialization  M a r i t a l R o l e Commitment  H o m e C a r e R o l e Commitment  Gender Schemas  25 action o f declaring and pursuing academic fields that m a y be sex-typed. M o d e l 2 is predicting the  commitment to future  family  and w o r k roles that m a y be related to early  gender  socialization. T h e path o f this relationship m a y be described or predicted better b y various theoretical frameworks. W h i l e learning theory and gender schema theory are both able to describe the gender developed i n c h i l d h o o d , neither theory has attempted to explain h o w this process mediates adulthood outcomes. B o t h models illustrate h o w parent-child gender socialization can be mediated b y either theoretical paradigm. I f the c h i l d h o o d serves as a time where information is sorted into the m i n d through schematic processing, then gender schema theory w o u l d be best suited to describe the  mediated  effects  o f gender  socialization into adulthood.  Gender  categories w o u l d influence later life decisions b y basing career, family, and academic interests o n what is considered congruent w i t h individuals' gender schemas. H o w e v e r , i f learning theory's  assumptions  that  children learn  through  observations,  models,  rewards  and  punishments, then the learned gender roles w o u l d mediate the relationship between gender socialization and adulthood outcomes. The individual w o u l d thus rely on their gender role ideologies i n order to m a k e the decisions that are congruent w i t h it. B o t h o f these theoretical assumptions must be tested i n order to understand this process. Thus, the question o f w h i c h theoretical paradigm can explain the effects o f c h i l d h o o d gender socialization is a s k e d i n this study. W h i l e other variables are not able to be measured i n this study, this m o d e l is testing the relationship between parent-child gender socialization and academic and career outcomes. F o r example, media influences are not measurable within the parameters  o f this retrospective  research study. H o w e v e r , despite the lack o f measures available to consider media and other influences o n gender socialization, the strength o f the m o d e l ' s assumptions w i l l indicate the  26 amount o f influence parents have.  Hypotheses T h e f o l l o w i n g hypotheses have been derived from models one and two: H I : Sex-typed c h i l d h o o d toys predict sex-typed university specializations. H 2 : Parent-child play predicts sex-typed university majors. H 3 . The sex o f play groups predicts sex-typed university majors H 4 : Sex-typed c h i l d h o o d toys predict sex-typed career choices and expectations. H 5 : Parent-child play predicts sex-typed career choices and expectations. H 6 : The sex o f play groups predicts sex-typed career choices and expectations. H 7 : Gender role ideologies mediate the relationships tested i n hypotheses 1 through 6. H 8 : Gender schemas mediate the relationships tested i n hypotheses 1 through 6.  Methods Dependent Variables. University Major/Specialization. U n i v e r s i t y majors or specializations are the areas i n w h i c h students have registered as their primary field o f study. Students at the university are required to have declared their specialization at the end o f their second year o f study. Specializations indicate w h i c h area o f interest the student w i l l be focusing on for the larger part o f their academic careers. The surveys had an open ended response item where respondents were asked to indicate their declared specialization. The university's Planning and Institutional R e s e a r c h ( P A I R ) office p r o v i d e d a list o f all specializations w i t h their respective b r e a k d o w n b y sex o f students w h o are enrolled i n the program. The percentage o f female enrollment i n the declared specialization o f the respondents was u s e d for analysis.  Career Expectations. Career expectations are the assumptions that respondents h o l d about their future employment and earnings b e y o n d the university setting. The measures for  27 career expectations determine whether individuals place salience to occupational and familial responsibilities. The L i f e R o l e Salience Scale ( L R S S ) (Amatea, C r o s s , C l a r k & B o b b y , 1986) consists o f items that measure role expectations for w o r k and family, based o n the levels o f importance and commitment to each o f the roles (see A p p e n d i x B to v i e w survey).These items are applicable to both sexes. A l l o f A m a t e a et al.'s (1986) four life role constructs i n the L R S S are used for the purposes o f this study. These constructs are occupational, parental, marital and homecare roles. O n l y the role commitment dimension o f these constructs w i l l be included. The role r e w a r d value dimension o f this scale does not apply to this research. A n example o f h o w the scale measures career expectations is as follows: higher levels o f commitment to the occupational role indicate masculine gender  ideologies. In contrast, higher parental role  commitment to parenthood indicates more feminine traits. These four dimensions o f the constructs are measured b y using a five-point Likert-type attitude scale o n levels o f agreement. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to w h i c h the statements about these constructs best describes their attitudes out o f five forced choice options. E x a m p l e s o f these questions are: ' I f I choose not to have children, I w i l l regret i t ' , and, T expect to devote whatever time and energy it takes to m o v e up i n m y job/career f i e l d ' . T h e L R S S ' s validity has been tested  across  student and married couple populations ( M c C u t c h e o n , 1998).  Independent Variables Sex-Typed Childhood Toys and Play. Sex-typed childhood toys are toys that are categorized to b e i n g appropriate for one sex. Subjects were be asked to recall w h i c h toys they o w n e d and p l a y e d w i t h during their c h i l d h o o d years. A l t h o u g h events i n infancy cannot be recalled from memory o f experience, the subjects should have some k n o w l e d g e o f the toys they were exposed to. F o r instance, photographs o f the c h i l d w i t h the toy, or i f the toy has been kept as a keepsake o f early childhood, should a l l o w the respondent to recall such toys.  28 C h i l d h o o d toys are measured i n the survey b y giving respondents the opportunity to indicate toys that they p l a y e d w i t h i n childhood. T h e toys that appear i n the survey i n the forced choice list include popular sex-typed toys that w o u l d be congruent w i t h the era o f w h e n respondents were y o u n g children. T h e sex-typed toys are toys that past research has found to appropriate for one sex, a n d not the other. T h e toys i n the survey are based i n F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n ' s (1990) extensive inventory o f adult sex-typed t o y categorizations. O n l y toys from F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n ' s (1990) inventory that correspond w i t h those used i n G i u l i a n o et a l . ' s (2000) survey research were used and adapted to attain a universal interpretation o f what sex-typed toys should be classified for this research. Those toys that correspond from the F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n (1990) assessment w i t h the G i u l i a n o et a l . (2000) research have maintained nearly the same sex-typed categories twenty years prior to this research (e.g., O ' B r i e n & H u s t o n , 1985). A l l items measuring toys a n d p l a y w i l l have an option labeled "other" where the respondents c a n write a toy or a form o f p l a y not o n the list. The mean scores for the toys a n d game play variables are used i n the analysis. T h e bivariate correlation between the feminine toy p l a y and feminine game p l a y variables is .80, p = 0, and the reliability analysis alpha is .89. Feminine toy p l a y average is c o m b i n e d w i t h feminine games average to create one variable, feminine toys and game play. T h e bivariate correlation between masculine toy p l a y a n d masculine game p l a y is .67, p = 0, a n d the reliability analysis alpha is .81. M a s c u l i n e toy play average w a s c o m b i n e d w i t h masculine games average to create one variable, masculine toy and game play. N e u t r a l t o y p l a y is calculated b y taking the mean score for the frequency o f neutral toy play. Parent-child play. Parent child p l a y is defined as the amount o f time a n d gender based play that subjects recall p l a y i n g w i t h i n early childhood. Participants were asked i n the survey to indicate w h i c h parent they remember playing w i t h more. Respondents answered o n a 5 point  29  scale whether they played each with their mothers and fathers never (1) to very often (5). These items measure which parent was more readily available for gender information in early childhood. As the research indicates, fathers and mothers provide different levels of sex-typed information in play sessions. Sex of Play  Groups.  The sex of play groups is defined as which sex of playmates  children had in early childhood. The sex of the play groups will help to measure another aspect of what other types of gender information children were exposed to. If the child engaged to play with children of the opposite sex, then this could create a different gendered environment than children who played only with same-sex peers. The cross sex-play could allow access to toys that are not congruent with their sex. The survey asked what play groups respondents played in when they were younger. The survey asked respondents to recall the frequency of play with each gender around the time when they were in preschool and first grade, when children are around 6 Vi years of age, and far more likely to have opposite sexed friends (Maccoby, 1990). However, these two measures do not have enough variation when gender is controlled for. Respondents report playing with only same-sexed peers in their early childhood. The lack of variance in measures indicates that they cannot be defined as variables, and were therefore droppedfromthe analysis. Hyppotheses 3 and 5 could not be tested. Control  Variables Parents'  Occupations.  Parents occupations are defined as what type of careers parents  have. The survey asked respondents which occupations both their mothers and fathers hold, and what type of category the occupations fall into (e.g., trades, health professions). Responses are coded into a new variable based on employment and stay at home professions. These control variables are tested to indicate whether having employed or stay at home parents has an effect on the outcome variables. This variable is included to ascertain whether fathers' and/or  30 mothers' occupations (as seen i n T i l l e c z e k & L e w k o ' s (2001) study) can predict academic paths, or career expectations.  Parent's Level of Education. Parents' education levels are controlled for i n a l l regressions.  Respondents are asked to indicate the highest level o f education both their  mothers and fathers have obtained. The responses range from some elementary s c h o o l to postgraduate degrees, and are c o d e d hierarchically.  Mediating Variables. Gender Role Ideologies. G e n d e r ideologies are the belief systems o f h o w m e n and w o m e n should behave and interact w i t h the social w o r l d . G e n d e r ideologies are learned through imitation o f gender roles, w h i c h are learned i n early c h i l d h o o d . These ideologies are products o f learning that children engage i n from infancy. L e a r n i n g theory assumes  that  children learn gender roles and behavioral social expectations from parental interactions i n infancy. L e a r n i n g theory should be measured with a scale that reflects ideologies and beliefs o f roles, w h i c h reflect their learning environments as children. The b r i e f 15 item version Attitudes T o w a r d s W o m e n Scale ( A W S ) (Spence, H e l m r e i c h , & Stapp, 1973) was i n c l u d e d i n the survey to measure gender and gender role ideologies. T h e A W S is the most frequently used scale o f gender role attitudes ( M c H u g h & F r i e z e , 1997) and has more than satisfactory psychometric properties i n measuring gender-role ideologies (Spence & H a h n , 1997). T h e shorter v e r s i o n was used as it has been found to have reliability scores i n the m i d -.80s and higher, as w e l l as having a unifactorial structure (Spence & H a h n , 1997; Spence et a l . , 1973). In the fifteen item scale, respondents are asked to respond to statements about w o m e n ' s roles. The forced choice responses are asked on a four point scale the degree to w h i c h they agree to the statements. Scores are calculated to give an overall gender ideology score.  Gender Schemas. G e n d e r schema theory's assumption that gender is learned through a  31 categorizing schema system w i l l be tested. U s i n g the short version o f B e r n ' s (1974) B e r n Sex R o l e Inventory ( B S R I ) , respondents gender schemas i n adulthood were measured. T h e short version o f the B S R I measures different components o f the gender schema and was tested i f the gender schema was a better predictor o f gender decisions regarding sex-typed academic specializations and career toys. The original 60-item version was not used, as it is considered b y many as being less psychometric than the short version (Hoffman & B o r d e r s , 2001). The items from the B S R I are scored o n a 7 point scale. Respondents use this scale to indicate h o w items describe them. Hoffman and B o r d e r s (2001) d i d a twenty-five year r e v i e w o f the B S R I and found that the short version has higher internal consistency than the original version, and demonstrates reliability and validity. The standardized scores are used i n the analysis.  Procedure Permission to  enter into undergraduate  courses  was  obtained prior to recruiting  participants from university classes. Students were approached during class time w i t h a b r i e f presentation outlining the research without giving away the hypotheses  and  assumptions  behind the research. The surveys were given i n addressed envelopes w i t h prepaid postage. I f the respondents  d i d not want to m a i l the surveys, the researcher came to the f o l l o w i n g 2  scheduled classes. Classes i n various departments were surveyed i n order to obtain variation i n declared specializations i n the sample.  Data Analysis T h e principle statistical tests are O L S regression. A s most o f the survey consists o f scale variables, regression is needed to interpret the v a r y i n g levels o f the independent variables to the levels o f dependent variables. M u l t i p l e regression is used to test the relationships i n the models. B a r o n and K e n n y ' s (1986) explanation o f h o w to measure mediating effects is used to measure  the gender  ideology and gender  schema effects  on the outcome variables. B y  32 definition, variations in independent variables must account for variations in the mediator, which in turn accounts variations in the outcome variables, or criterion (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Holmbeck, 1997). From the models' descriptions, variations in socialization account for variations in gender ideologies and gender schemas. These mediators may account for variations in career and university decisions. Multiple regression is used in four conditions to test each independent variable. The first analysis assesses the significance of the relationship between the independent variables and the mediating variables. The significance of the path between the independent variables and the outcome variables are assessed next. Then both the independent variables and the mediators are used in the third equation to predict the outcome variables, where Baron and Kenny (1986) recommend simultaneous entry as opposed to hierarchical regression. This is recommended so that the mediator is controlled for when assessing the effect of the independent variable on the outcome variables, and the independent variable is controlled for when assessing the effect of the mediators on the outcome variables. When the mediator is controlled for, the relationship between the independent variables and the outcome variables should be smaller than the relationship when it is not controlled for (in the second equation) (Holmbeck, 1997). Relationships that do not attain statistical significance will be reported. Due to the small sample size, p levels up to .10 will be reported. The focus will be on the relationships between the variables that are found within the sample. As the target sample consists of respondents that have volunteered to participate in the study, the sample is a non-probability sample. The respondents are not randomly selected, and are not representative of a population. The nature of non-probability samples limits inference to a larger population, for both statistically significant and non-significant relationships. Relationships that do not reach significance cannot be inferred beyond to other populations.  33 For  all o f the relationships tested, parental occupation and level o f education are  controlled. T o enhance clarity, the control variables are not reported in the tables. The models are tested for their overall relationships w i t h a l l five independent and mediating variables. W h e n a dummy variable for gender is used in the regressions, many o f the relationships do not h o l d for the  overall  sample, indicating that the  gender  o f the respondent  changes  the  relationships. The models are thus also tested for female only and male only respondents. A s the sample was not randomly selected from the general population, regressions that y i e l d relationships that are not significant w i l l be discussed i n this section. The issue o f the significance levels w i l l be discussed i n the limitations sections. Results  Sample Description Three hundred and sixty-eight surveys were handed out to nine senior level courses, and one l o w e r level course. O f the 368 surveys, 279 were returned and 277 were useable. The overall response rate is 75.8%. The courses that were surveyed were from v a r y i n g departments and subjects (Table 1). The sample is c o m p r i s e d o f 175 w o m e n and 102 men. T h e average age o f the respondents is 21.9 years. The sample's ethnic origin is m a i n l y A s i a n and N o r t h A m e r i c a n (see Table 1). The respondents have highly educated parents: the majority o f mothers and fathers had post-secondary training. their majors, w h i l e 2 0 . 2 % have not.  The majority o f the respondents (79.1%) have declared The respondents that had not declared their majors  indicated w h i c h majors they w i l l be declaring. Referring to Table 1.1, over h a l f o f the sample indicated they have declared specializations that have between 50 and 75 percent registered i n their majors.  females  34 Table 1.  Sample Description. Independent Variable  Total  Percent  106 53 20 19 14 14 14 12  38.3% 19.1% 9.0% 7.2% .5.1% 5.1% 5.1% 4.3%  Asian North-American European  111 90 26  40.1% 32.5% 9.4%  M i x e d Background South-East A s i a n M i d d l e Eastern African  22 20 6 2  C l a s s Surveyed F a m i l y Studies C i v i l Engineering Mathematics Sociology E l e c t r i c a l Engineering Computer Science History Philosophy Ethnic O r i g i n  7.9% 7.2% 2.2% 0.7%  M o t h e r ' s Highest L e v e l o f Education Post-Graduate Degree  19  6.9%  U n i v e r s i t y Degree Some Post-Secondary Highschool Diploma  115 62 49  41.5% 22.4% 17.7%  Some or no H i g h s c h o o l  27  9.8%  Post-Graduate Degree  53  19.1%  U n i v e r s i t y Degree Some Post-Secondary Highschool Diploma Some or no H i g h s c h o o l  112 47 32 31  40.4% 17.0% 11.6% 11.2%  Father's Highest L e v e l o f Education  Note. n=277.  35 Table 2.  Percentages of Females Enrolled in Declared Majors/Specializations. Independent Variable  Total  Percent  175  63.2%  -  64.6%  102  36.8%  -  43.2%  D e c l a r e d Specialization  219  79.1%  Specialization Enrollment 2 5 % or less female 2 5 - 5 0 % female 5 0 - 7 5 % female 7 5 - 1 0 0 % female  40 41 145 48  14.6% 14.9% 52.3% 17.1%  Women Percent female enrolment In Specialization Men Percent female enrolment In Specialization  .  Note. n = 277.  HP. Sex-typed Childhood Toys and Play Predict Sex-typed University Specializations. Overall. The beta for overall regression between the feminine toys and play variable and the percent female enrollment i n specializations is .41 (p = 0) (Table 3). P l a y i n g w i t h feminine toys and games explains 17.2% o f the variance i n the relationship. There is a moderate, negative relationship between the masculine toys and play variable and the percent female enrollment variable (fi = -.27, p = 0) for the overall sample. M a s c u l i n e toys and game play explains 7.8% o f the variance i n the specialization variable. N e u t r a l toy play was also positively related to the percent o f females i n the declared major for the overall sample. These relationships indicate that overall, there is a positive relationship between p l a y i n g feminine  toys  and  in  feminine  games  and  choosing  female  dominated  with  university  specializations. P l a y i n g more frequently w i t h feminine toys and games, and w i t h neutral toys, is related to declaring a specialization w i t h a higher female to male ratio. H i g h e r frequency o f  36 play w i t h masculine toys is related to being enrolled i n specializations w i t h l o w e r female enrollment.  Sex-typed  c h i l d h o o d toys  predicts  enrolling i n sex-typed  university  majors,  corifinning hypothesis 1 for the overall sample. Women. W h e n the direct relationship for the w o m e n i n the sample is tested, the correlation is very small and not significant between traditionally female specializations  feminine toy and game play  and  (Table 4). A m o n g female respondents, an extremely w e a k  direct negative relationship between masculine toy and game play and the number o f females enrolled i n declared majors. The relationship between neutral toy play and female enrollment i n university specializations is positive, but w e a k and not significant. These results indicate that p l a y i n g w i t h any sex-typed toys i n c h i l d h o o d for w o m e n does not predict enrolling i n sextyped university majors i n adulthood. Hypothesis 1 does not h o l d for the w o m e n i n this sample. Men.  The beta for the relationship for the men i n the sample between feminine toys and  play and traditionally female majors is .20, and is close to significance (p =.06) (Table 5). P l a y i n g w i t h feminine  toys and games explains 7 % o f the variance i n declaring a female  dominated major for the men i n the sample. A higher reported frequency o f p l a y i n g w i t h feminine toys and games i n c h i l d h o o d is related to enrolling i n university specializations that are  more  traditionally female.  M a s c u l i n e toy and game play and neutral  toys  are  not  significantly related to enrolling i n sex-typed majors. Hypothesis 1 only holds true for m e n for feminine-typed play.  H2: Parent-child Play Predicts Sex-typed University Majors. Overall. T h e strength o f the overall relationship between the frequency o f p l a y i n g w i t h mother and enrolling i n female dominated specializations is very w e a k and not significant (Table 3). There is no relationship for the overall m o d e l between p l a y i n g w i t h fathers and enrolling i n female dominated university specializations. Hypothesis 2 does not h o l d true for  37 the overall model, as p l a y i n g w i t h mothers and fathers does not predict sex-typed university majors. Women. F o r w o m e n , p l a y i n g more frequently w i t h their mothers is negatively and w e a k l y related to enrolling in female dominated specializations (Table 4). T h i s relationship is not significant. P l a y i n g w i t h fathers is not related to sex-typed specialization. There is n o correlation between the frequency o f playing w i t h fathers and the sex-typed nature o f the university majors for w o m e n . Hypothesis 2 is not supported for the w o m e n i n the sample. Men. The frequency o f play w i t h mothers and w i t h fathers i n c h i l d h o o d are both w e a k l y related  sex-typed specializations (Table 5). T h e relationship for p l a y i n g w i t h fathers  is  stronger, and explains 4 . 7 % o f the variance i n declaring female dominated university majors. H o w e v e r , neither relationship is significant. Despite the significance level, p l a y i n g w i t h both mothers and fathers more often i n c h i l d h o o d is w e a k l y related to enrolling i n more femininetyped majors for men, w h i c h provides evidence that hypothesis 2 holds for men.  H4: Sex-typed Childhood Toys and Play Predict Sex-typed Career Choices and Expectations. Overall.  In the overall m o d e l , p l a y i n g w i t h feminine toys and games has a w e a k  negative relationship to the occupational role commitment, a w e a k positive relationship to both parenting and marital role commitments, and a moderate positive relationship to home care commitment. The relationship to the home care role is the only significant relationship. H o w e v e r , feminine play explains only 1.9% o f the variance i n home care commitment levels. P l a y i n g w i t h masculine toys and games has only one significant relationship to any o f the role commitment variables. M a s c u l i n e toy and game play i n c h i l d h o o d is positively related to occupational role commitment. N e u t r a l toy play is negatively related to occupational role commitment. N e u t r a l play is has  a weak, positive relationship to  the  home  care  role  commitment, though not significant (.11, p =.09). P l a y i n g more frequently w i t h neutral toys i n  Table 3 Regressions  for the Overall  Sample  Independent Variables  Between  Childhood  Socialization  Variables  and Adulthood  Female Major B 13  Occupation Role B 13  8.89**  -.07  Outcome  Variables  Parenting Role B  B  Marital Role 13  B  Home Care Role 13  Toy Variables Feminine Toys and Games R  .41  .17  2  Masculine Toys and Games  -7.47**  -.27  2  Neutral Toy Play  5.08**  2  .16  .20  -.12*  .06  .04  -.02  -.15  .08  -.02  -.05  .02  .10  .08*  .12  .02 -.07  -.09  .10  .01  .01  .04  .03  .07  .01  .03  .03  .04  R  .14**  .05 .03  .02  .08  R  .10  .04  .09f  .11  .02  .01  Parent Play Variables Playing with Mother  .85  R  ,01  2  Playing with Father R  2  Note.  -.47 .01  .04  -.05  -.08  -.08* .02  .07*  .07  .03  .01 -.02  .04  -.12  .12**  .14  .05  .06  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; tp^O.10; *p<0.050; **p^0.01,  .02 n -  111.  .16  .03  .03 .17  .12*  .09  .11* .03  .15  Table 4 Regressions for Women's Relationships Between Childhood Socialization Variables and Adulthood Outcome Variables  Independent Variables  Female Major B  13  1.02  .04  Parenting Role B  B  B  B  Marital Role B  Home Care Role B  B  Toy Variables Feminine Toys and Games R  2  Masculine Toys and Games R  2  Neutral Toys and Games R  2  -.02  .08  .09  -.01  .06  .11  .10  .01  .14 t  .15 *  .17  .03 .08  .03  .02  .01  .12 .04  .02  .01 1.93  .06  .02  .01 -.51  .06  .00  .05  .05  .05  .01 .00  .00 .15  .05  -.05  .04  .01 .07  .01  .05  .06  .01  Parent Play Variables Playing with Mother R  2  Playing with Father R  2  -1.62  -.10  .01 -.35 .01  .02  .04  .02 -.02  -.11* .04  .07  .10  .16 ** .07  .13  .02  .04 -.17  .07  .22  .03 .01  .04  .06  .01 .05  .09f  .13  .02  Note. All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp<0.10; *p^0.050; **p^0.01, n - 175.  CO CO  Table 5 Regressions for Men's Relationships Between Childhood Socialization Variables and Adulthood Outcome Variables  Independent Variables  ;  Female Major B 13  Occupation Role B B  B  Parenting Role B  B  Marital Role B  B  Home Care Role B  Toy Variables Feminine Toys and Games R  10.16f  .20  .07  2  Masculine Toys and Games R  5.40  Neutral Toys and Games R  2.12  .15  .18  .09  .21*  -.23  -.13  .05 .15  .04  .04  2  -.08  .03  .05  2  -.13  -.07  .08  -.02  -.05  .03 -.06  .04 -.26  -.06  -.21*  .03  .00  .13  .03 -.24  .08 -.02  .22  -.04  -.03  .01 -.01  .03  .09  .11  .02  Parent Play Variables Playing with Mother  2.48  R  .04  2  Playing with Father  2.70  R  .05  2  Note.  .11  -.19**  -.27  .09 .13  -.08 .03  -.01  -.01  .03 -.11  .08  .08  .16  .05 .12  .05  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp<0.10; *p^0.050; **p^0.01,  .09 .05 n— 105.  .23**  .30  .10 .17  .16* .06  .23  41 childhood is correlated with having lower occupational role comrnitrnent, and is weakly related to having higher comrnitrnent to home care roles. Similarly, playing more often with feminine toys and games in childhood is moderately related to being less committed to future occupational roles, and moderately related to having higher commitment to caring for future homes. Women. Women's scores on the feminine toys and game play variable are significantly and positively related to the marital role variable; all other relationships were not significant. There are no significant relationships between playing with masculine toys and games in childhood and any of the LRSS role dimensions. These relationships are also very weak. Playing with neutral toys in childhood is positively related to parental role commitment, though this relationship did not reach significance (fi =.15, p =.051; R = .03). For the women 2  in the sample, playing more frequently feminine with toys and games is correlated to higher commitment to future marital roles. Playing with more frequently with neutral toys is related to women's higher commitment to future parenting roles. Men. Men's feminine toy and game play scores are not significantly related to the LRSS dimensions; however, there is a moderate negative correlation with the parental role (R^.05), and a positive correlation with the home care role (R*=.03). Playing with masculine toys and games in childhood is negatively related to marital role commitment, and explains 8.2 % of the variation in the marital commitment. This is the only significant relationship for masculine toys and games on the LRSS dimensions for the men; however, there was a positive relationship to occupational role commitment (6=15, p =.14). Childhood neutral toy play produces a negative relationship to occupational role comrnitment. The relationships to the other role commitment variables are not significant. Playing in feminine play is related to lower parenting role commitment, and higher home care commitment for men. Masculine toy  42 and game play for men is related to l o w e r commitment to future marital relationships. N e u t r a l toy play predicts higher occupational role commitment for men.  H5: Parent-child Play Predicts Sex-typed Career Choices and Expectations. Overall. P l a y i n g w i t h mothers  i n c h i l d h o o d is positively related to marital role  commitment and home care role commitment. P l a y i n g w i t h fathers was related to three o f the o f the four L R S S role dimensions. P l a y i n g more often w i t h fathers i n c h i l d h o o d was related to lower occupational role commitment, and higher for both parenting and home care role commitment i n adulthood.  Women. The female respondents have t w o moderate relationships between p l a y i n g w i t h their mothers and being committed to future parenting and marital roles. P l a y i n g w i t h fathers for w o m e n is negatively related to occupational role commitment, and positively to parental role commitment. P l a y i n g w i t h fathers explains 4.2 % o f the variance o f occupational role commitment scores, and 7 . 2 % o f the variance i n the parenting role commitment scores. There is a moderate positive relationship to the home care role, though it is not significant (13 =.13, p =.09). H i g h e r frequency o f play w i t h mothers i n c h i l d h o o d is correlated w i t h h o l d i n g higher commitment to being a parent and mamtaining a marital relationship for the w o m e n i n the sample. W o m e n w h o p l a y e d more often w i t h fathers i n c h i l d h o o d are more likely to be more committed to being a parent, and are less likely to be committed to future employment. Men. F o r the male respondents, p l a y i n g w i t h mothers i n c h i l d h o o d is negatively related to occupational role commitment, and explains 8.8% o f the variance i n the role. moderate  There is a  positive relationship to the marital role commitment, but it was not significant  (13= 16; p =.12). P l a y i n g w i t h both mothers and fathers i n c h i l d h o o d was positively related to the home care role commitment ( R = .10; R 2  2  = .06). The positive relationships to the martial  and parenting roles are moderate i n size, though not significant. There was a w e a k negative  43 relationship to the occupational role. L e s s commitment to future occupational roles is related to playing more frequently w i t h both parents i n c h i l d h o o d , especially w i t h mothers. P l a y i n g more frequently  w i t h both parents i n c h i l d h o o d is also related to being more  committed to  maintaining a marital relationship and maintaining future homes i n adulthood. P l a y i n g w i t h fathers is moderately related to being committed to being a parent.  HI:- Gender Role Ideologies Mediate the Relationships tested in Hypotheses l,2,4,and 5. Overall There is no relationship between p l a y i n g w i t h fathers and gender role ideologies, w h i c h discounts any mediating relationships w i t h this independent variable for the overall sample (Tables 6 & 7). W h e n the percent female enrollment is tested as a dependent variable, the regression analysis indicates that gender ideologies have a mediating effect o n the f o l l o w i n g independent variables: feminine and masculine toy and game play, neutral toy play, and the frequency o f play w i t h mothers, though this relationships is w e a k and not significant. C o m p a r e d to the direct relationship, p l a y i n g w i t h masculine toys and games i n c h i l d h o o d explains more o f the variance (12.4%) i n enrolling i n female dominated majors w h e n gender ideologies are tested as a mediator. G e n d e r role ideologies mediate only one other relationship, w h i c h is between feminine toy and game play and the occupational role. The direct relationship is not significant, but the relationship decreases close to zero i n the mediating regression. T h e perception o f what gender appropriate roles should be mediates relationships for the overall sample between sex-typed c h i l d h o o d toy play and declaring traditionally female university majors. This perception also explains part o f the relationship between c h i l d h o o d feminine play and being committed to future employment. Women. F o r the w o m e n i n the sample, gender role ideologies cannot be tested as a mediator, as there is no relationship between neutral toys and gender role ideologies. T h e w e a k positive correlation between p l a y i n g w i t h feminine toys i n childhood is not significant, but  44 Table 6 Regressions for Overall Sample's Mediating Regression Between Neutral Toy Play and Adulthood Outcome Variables :  Independent Variables  Parenting Role  Occupation Role  Female Major  Feminine Toys and Games  8.03**  .37  -.08f  -.02  .07  .09  Gender Role Ideologies  7.95*  .14  .06  .04  -.17  -.09  2  Feminine Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  2  Masculine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies R  2  Masculine Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  2  Neutral Toy Play Gender Role Ideologies R  2  B  13  13  13  R  '  B  B  .04  .02  .19 8.50**  .39  -.05  -.08  .01  .02  .14  .08  .00  -.09  .01**  .18  .06  .03  .18 12.50**  .22  .14 **  .16  -.02  -.02  .02  .00  .04  .02  -.13  -.07  .12  .03  .03  -.62**  -.23  .21*  .12  .12 * .00  .14 -.08  .04  .09  .03  .03  .01**  .19  .06  3.50*  .15  -.13 *  -.16  .iot  .12  12.22**  .22  .06  .04  -.17  -.09  .04  :03  .09  Neutral Toy Play  4.50**  .18  -.11 *  -.13  .06  .07  Gender Schemas  .25*  .14  .00  -.09  .01**  .17  R  2  .06  .04  .06  Note. All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; |p<0.10; *p<0.050; **p<0.01, n — 277.  45  Table 6 Continued Regressions Adulthood  for  Overall  Outcome  Sample's  Mediating  Regression  Between  Childhood  Socialization  Independent Variables  Marital Role B B .04  .08  .11*  .15  Gender Role Ideologies  -.06  -.04  -.20f  -.11  R  .01  Feminine Toys and Games  .01  .03  .07  .09  .01*  .15  .oit  .11  2  Gender Schemas  Gender Role Ideologies  -.07  -.iot  -.11  -.04  .00  -.14  -.08  .01  Masculine Toys and Games  -.02  2  Gender Schemas  .03  -.05  R  .01*  .02 -.03 .15  .03  2  Neutral Toy Play Gender Role Ideologies R  .03  .03  2  Masculine Toys and Games  R  -.06 .oit  -.07 .12  .03  .03  .05  .11*  .13  -.04  -.03  -.17  -.09  .02  .01  2  Neutral Toy Play  .01  .02  .07  .08  Gender Schemas  .01*  .15  .01*  .12  R  2  Note.  and  Home Care Role B B  Feminine Toys and Games  R  Variables  Variables  .03  .03  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp<0.10; *p<0.050; **p<0.01,  n —  211.  Table 7 Regressions  for Overall  Sample's  Mediating  Relationships  Independent Variables Playing with Mother Gender Role Ideologies  Between  Female Major B 13 .01 14.12**  Parent  Play  and Adulthood  Occupation Role B 13  Outcome  B  Variables  Parenting Role 13  .00  -.06  -.08  .06  .08  .25  .03  .02  -.15  -.08  Marital Role 13  Home Care Role 13  B  .08*  .14  .12**  .17  -.06  -.04  -.17  -.09  R  .06  Playing with Mother  .51  .02  -.05  -.07  .04  .05  .07*  .12  .01*  .14  .30**  .17  -.01t  -.11  .01**  .18  .01*  .15  .02*  .13  2  Gender Schemas R  Playing with Father Gender Role Ideologies R  Gender Schemas 2  Note.  -.67 14.26**  .03  -.13 .30** .03  -.08*  -.12  .25  .01  .01  .02 -.09*  -.13  .17  -.01*  -.12  .04  .05  .05  .12**  .17  .05  .09  .11*  .16  -.13  -.07  -.03  -.02  -.13  -.07  .06  -.01  .04  .03  .06  .03  .07  2  Playing with Father  R  .01  .04  2  .04  B  .01**  .02  .03  .19  .05|  .10  .11**  .17  .20  .01**  .17  .01*  .15  .10  .04  .05  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; "fp<0.10;*p<0.050; **p^0.01, n = 277.  CD  47  Table 8  Women's Regressions for Mediating Relationships Between Childhood Socialization and Adulthood Outcome Variables  Female Major B  Independent Variables Feminine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies R  Gender Schemas  B  Parenting Role B  .03  .04  .04  .13  .11  4.93  .09  .31*  .16  -.12  -.06  .04  .04  .39  .01  .08  .07  .11  .09  .20|  .14  .00  -.08  .01  .11  .02  2  Occupation Role 6  B  .75  .01  2  Feminine Toys and Games  R  B  .05  .03  Masculine Toys and Games  -1.01  -.03  .04  .04  .12  .09  Gender Role Ideologies  5.41  .10  •31t  .16  -.13  -.06  R  Masculine Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  .04  .02  2  .02  .00  .07  .06  .12  .09  .20t  .14  .00  -.06  .011  .13  .02  2  .03  .02  Neutral Toys and Games  1.76  .08  -.02  Gender Role Ideologies  4.73  .09  .32*  .05 -.02 .17  .16  -.12  -.06  R  .02  Neutral Toys and Games  1.64  .07  -.01  .00  .13|  .14  .19t  .13  .00  -.07  .01  .11  2  Gender Schemas R  2  Note.  .03  .04  .15*  .02  .05  .06  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp^O. 10; *p<0.050; **p<0.01,  n—  175.  48  Table 8 Continued Women's Regressions for Mediating Relationships Between Childhood Socialization and Adulthood Outcome Variables .  Independent Variables Feminine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies  Marital Role 13  B  .16* -.20  Home Care Role 13  B  .18  .06  .06  -.12  -.26  -.13  R  .04  Feminine Toys and Games  .14*  .15  .04  .04  .00  .08  .00  .06  2  Gender Schemas R  .02  .04  2  Masculine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies  .01  .02  .02  -.03  -.02  -.17  -.10  -.24  -.12  .02  R  .01  Masculine Toys and Games  .01  .01  -.05  -.04  .00  .10  .00  .06  2  Gender Schemas R  .01  2  .01  Neutral Toys and Games  .06  .08  .06  .07  Gender Role Ideologies  -.18  -.11  -.26  -.13  R  .02  2  Neutral Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  2  Note.  .02  .04  .06  .05  .05  .00  .09  .00  .06  .02  .01  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fP^O-10; *p^0.050; **p^0.01, n — 175.  Table 9 Women's Regressions for Mediating Relationships Between Parent Play and Adulthood Outcome Variables  Independent Variables  Female Major fl  B  Occupation Role B  13  Parenting Role B  13  Marital Role B  13  .13  Home Care Role B  13  WOMEN Playing with Mother Gender Role Ideologies R  Playing with Mother Gender Schemas  Gender Role Ideologies  Playing with Father Gender Schemas 2  Note.  .03  .07  .11  .07f  5.4  .10  .32*  .16  -.11  -.05  .04  .04  .04  .07  -.18  -.26  -.13  .03  .02  -1.75  .10  .03  .05  .01  .10  .07  .12  .04  .06  •21t  .14  .00  -.08  .01  .12  .00  .10  .00  .07  .02  .03  .05  .01  -.27  -.02  -.10*  -.16  .15**  .22  .02  .04  5.04  .10  .31*  .16  -.07  -.03  -.16  -.10  .07  .01  2  R  .02  .03  2  Playing with Father  R  .10  .02  2  R  -1.7  -.10 .20t .02  -.01 .14  .07  -.12*  -.18  ,01  -.09  .05  .01*  .02  .09f  .13  -.23  -.12  .03  .23  .03  .06  .10t  .14  .15  .54  .12  .00  .09  .09  .02  .03  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; tP^O.10; *p<0.050; **p^0.01, n= 175.  -t>. CD  50  Table 10 Men's Regressions for Mediating Relationships Between Childhood Socialization and Adulthood Outcome Variables  Independent Variables Mediating: Feminine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies R  Female Major B B  Feminine Toys and Games Gender Schemas 2  Mediating: Masculine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies R  -.10  -.06  -.20  -.11  9.12  .17  -.21  -.12  -.19  -.10  .04  Mediating: Masculine Toys and Games Gender Schemas  .06  10.08J  .20  -.09  -.06  .02  .01  -.01  -.12  .04  -.33 .02*  -.18 .30  .13  5.39  .15  .18  .15  -.07  -.06  10.66|  .20  -.23  -.13  -.22  -.12  .06  .09  2  Parenting Role B  .17  .07  R  B  8.77|  .10  2  Occupation Role B  B  5.90 .13  .05  .16  .15  .13  .08  -.01  -.11  .00  .00  .02*  .26  .10  .05  R  .06  Mediating: Neutral Toys and Games  .88  .04  -.19*  -.24  .01  .01  10. iot  .19  -.12  -.07  -.23  -.12  2  Gender Role Ideologies R  .07  2  Neutral Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  2  Note.  .05  .09  2.00  .08  -.19 *  -.24  -.05  .05  .03  -.01  -.09  .02**  .04  .09  -.07 .28  .11  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; tp^O. 10; *p^0.050; **p^0.01, n - 102.  Table 10 Continued Men's Regressions for Mediating Relationships Between Childhood Socialization and Adulthood Outcome Variables Independent Variables Feminine Toys and Games Gender Role Ideologies  Marital Role B B -.08  -.07  ' .25  .14  .15  -.12  -.15  -.09  R  .04  Feminine Toys and Games  -.13  2  Gender Schemas  Home Care Role B B  .01**  .03 -.10  .16  .09  .29  .oit  .19  R  .11  Masculine Toys and Games  -.21*  -.24  -.04  -.03  Gender Role Ideologies  .14  .11  -.11  -.06  2  R  2  Masculine Toys and Games Gender Schemas  .06  .02  .09 -.17f  -.20  .01  .01  .01*  .23  .01*  .21  .05  R  .13  Neutral Toys and Games  -.02  -.04  .12  .14  Gender Role Ideologies  .15  .12  -.18  -.10  2  R  2  Neutral Toys and Games Gender Schemas R  2  .04 -.03 .01** .10  .03 -.06  .06  .08  .28  .oit  .20  .06  Note. All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp^O. 10; *p^0.050; **p<0.01, n— 102.  Table 11 Men's  Regress  ions for Mediating  Relationships  Independent Variables Mediating: Playing with Mother Gender Role Ideologies R  Playing with Mother Gender Schemas  Gender Role Ideologies  Mediating: Playing with Father Gender Schemas R  2  Note.  and Adulthood  B  Outcome  Occupation Role 6  Variables  B  Parenting Role 13  B  Marital Role (3  1.51  .07  -.18  -.25  .02  .03  .08  .14  9.73f  .18  -.12  -.07  -.24  -.13  .09  .07  .09  .05  .05  Home Care Role 13 B .25** -.26  .33 -.15  .11  2.40  .11  -.06  -.09  .11  .16  .08  .16  .18*  .26  .05  .03  -.19  -.11  -.30  -.16  .09  .07  -.23  -.13  .07  -.19  .04  .07  .06  1.79  .09  -.06  -.09  .11  .16  .08  .16  .18*  .26  9.48  .18  -.19  -.11  -.30  -.16  .09  .07  -.23  -.06  .08  2  Play  . Female Major B 13  .04  2  Mediating: Playing with Father  R  Parent  .07  2  R  Between  2.8 .08 .05  .04  .07  .06  .07  .13  -.07  -.11  .08  .11  .08f  .17  .16 *  .23  .05  -.07  -.13  .02 **  .26  .01**  .27  .01 *  .21  .05  .12  .11  .10  All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp<0.10; *p<0.050; **p<0.01, n= 102.  N>  Figure 2. Women's  Relationships.  Occupational Role Commitment Neutral Toy Play  (. 154^ Parental Role Commitment  Marital Role Commitment  Home Care Role Commitment  Figure 3.  Men's Relationships: Model  1.  Feminine Toys & Play (19?  Masculine Toys & Play  U471 *  &/ Play with Mother  /  V  *  Play with Father  tp^O.10; «p .050; "psO.Ol; ^mediatedrelationships s0  Ol  Figure 4. Men's Relationships: Model 2,  P<0.10; *p,0.050; **p.O.OI; ^cdiatcd^atioasbips  +  56 strong enough to test mediating relationships (Tables 8 & 9). Gender role ideologies have a mediating effect only on the relationship between feminine toy and game play and the percent female enrollment. The direct relationship is too small (and not significant) to conclude a mediating relationship. Gender role ideologies do not mediate any o f the relationships between sex-typed toy play i n c h i l d h o o d and declaring traditionally female or male majors i n university. T h e direct relationships between masculine toy and game play and occupational and home care commitments are weak and not significant, but are mediated b y gender role ideologies as w e l l . Men.  F o r the male respondents, there was no relationship between masculine toy play  and gender ideologies, thus it cannot be defined as a mediator. T h o u g h the relationship  from  feminine toy play to gender ideologies is not significant, the size o f the relationship gives justification to test it as a mediator (Tables 10 & 11). W h e n the regressions that test the percent female enrollment i n majors as the dependent variable are conducted, the independent variables that are mediated b y gender role ideologies are feminine toy and game play, neutral toy play, and the frequency o f play w i t h both parents. H o w e v e r , the feminine toy play relationship is the closest to significance (6 = .200, p =.06). The impact o f p l a y i n g w i t h feminine toys and games and c h i l d h o o d o n parental role commitment is partially mediated b y gender role ideologies, though the direct relationship is not significant. T h e meditating m o d e l explains 5.9 % o f the variation i n the parenting role. Gender  role  ideologies  explain part o f the  relationship between  neutral  toy play  and  occupational commitment, but no other relationships to the other L R S S roles. T h e impact o f the frequency o f p l a y i n g w i t h parents on being committed to future employment is mediated b y gender role ideologies, though only the frequency o f play w i t h mothers' direct relationship is significant. There is also a mediating (but not significant) effect between  frequency  o f play  w i t h mothers and the marital role commitment. B e i n g committed to future occupational roles  57 and being committed to mamtaining future marital roles is related to time spent playing with mothers and fathers in childhood, as well as by individuals' gender role ideologies. Playing more with feminine toys for men in childhood is related to lower commitment to parenting roles, and is mediated by gender role ideologies. H8: Gender Schemas Mediate the Relationships tested in Hypotheses l,2,4,and 5.  Overall. In the overall sample, gender schemas mediate the relationships between feminine toys and game play and the following variables: the percentage of females enrolled in declared specializations, the occupation role, and the home care role. The weak relationships to the parenting and marital roles are also mediated by gender schemas, but these relationships are not significant. Although none of these relationships decrease to zero when the mediator is added into the regression equations, mediating effects are still found. Gender schemas mediate the relationships the overall sample has between engaging in feminine play in childhood, and the extent to which their chosen majors are traditional, as well as their commitment to their future occupational and home care roles. Gender schemas also mediate the relationships between childhood masculine toy and game play and neutral toy play on the percent of females enrolled in declared majors. Masculine toy play and gender schemas explain 8.6% of the variance in declaring female dominated majors, which is less than the gender ideologies explain. The relationship between masculine play and occupational role commitment is also mediated by gender schemas: the direct relationships to the parenting and marital roles are weak and not significant, but gender schemas still act as mediators. Gender schemas mediate all relationships between neutral toy play and the four role dimensions, though only the direct relationship to the occupational role was significant. None of these are perfect mediating relationships, as the direct relationships do not decrease to zero.  58 Neither the frequency of play with mothers nor, the frequency of play with fathers produce relationships strong enough to define gender schemas as a mediator. Though gender schemas do produce mediating effects on some of the tested relationships with the parent play measures, by definition, a mediator must be caused by the independent variable. These weak causal relationships are too small to definitively argue that gender schemas are mediators. Women. The women's frequency of play with mothers is not related to gender schemas, and thus gender schemas do not mediate any relationships with the mother play variable. Gender schemas have a mediating effect on the three sex-typed toy play independent variables when regressions are run to the percent female enrollment in university majors (Figure 2). However, it must be noted that none of the direct relationships are significant, and are weak. This indicates that gender schemas, or individual self-perceptions of masculinity and femininity, explain a small part of the relationships between playing with sex-typed toys in childhood and whether respondents chose to enroll in traditionally female or male university majors. The positive relationship between playing with feminine toys and games in childhood and marital role commitment is mediated by gender schemas. This effect is small; feminine play explains 4.4% of the variance in the marital role.  Although the parenting role  commitment variable does not have a significant relationship with feminine toys and games, gender schemas have a small mediating effect on the correlation. Masculine toys and games for the women in the sample did not create any significant relationships to the LRSS dimensions, though there is a mediating effect on the occupational role. Neutral toy play has a direct relationship to the parenting role commitment, but not significant ( 6 = .14; p =.051) and is slightly mediated by gender schemas. Gender schemas do not mediate any relationships between playing with fathers and the LRSS roles.  59 Men. For the men in the sample, only the toy play variables are related to gender schemas, though masculine play and neutral toy play are not significant (B= -.19; p =.06, = 17: p =.10). Despite the significance levels, the strength of the relationships and the small size of the male sample are considerations for testing gender schemas as mediators. Out of the three toy play variables, only the relationship between neutral toy play and percent female enrollment in declared specializations is mediated by gender schemas; this mediating effect is not very strong. This indicates that self-perceptions of masculine and feminine traits have a small impact on the relationship to how traditionally female the declared university specialization. Gender schemas mediate the relationship between feminine toys and game play on the home care role, though the direct relationship is not significant. The relationships between all three toy variables to the occupational role commitment variable are also mediated by gender schemas, however, only the direct relationship from neutral toy play is significant. The effect of masculine toys and game play on the marital role for men is mediated by gender schemas, as the direct relationship decreases. The relationship to occupational role commitment is not significant (.15, p =.14), but is mediated by gender schemas. Gender schemas explain part of the relationship between feminine childhood play and declaring traditionally female major, as well as the relationship between playing in masculine play and the extent to which men are committed to future marital roles. Neutral toy play effects on occupational role commitment is mediated by gender schemas Discussion The purpose of this study is not to find direct relationships between sex-typed toys and play and adulthood career choices, but rather to find out if early childhood gender socialization predict specific adulthood outcomes. Sex-typed toys are used as indicators of the gender  60 socialization subjects were exposed to i n early childhood. These indicators are tested i n relation to adulthood career and university expectations and outcomes to find whether early c h i l d h o o d gender socialization matters i n terms o f outcomes. The questions are centered around finding out i f c h i l d h o o d variables are important factors that carry through to adulthood. T h e focus o f this study w a s to understand the gender socialization process from infancy into adulthood. The parameters o f this research only a l l o w for certain variables to be tested, and it must be made clear that there are many intervening variables that affect gender development from c h i l d h o o d into adulthood. Feminine socialization on y o u n g children does matter for some adults and their career outcomes. M e n are particularly sensitive to this type o f socialization, as it can predict their chances  o f enrolling i n traditionally female university specializations. B e i n g exposed  to  feminine socialization i n early c h i l d h o o d m a y be an indicator that parents are more w i l l i n g to expose these b o y s to other types o f fenrinine socialization such as feminine academic options, w h i c h opens the doors for the men to be comfortable to pursue these academic fields. F o r men, however, masculine socialization also has the same effect on their academic outcomes. T h i s relationship can be explained by the fact that boys receive more sex-typed messages i n their childhood, and masculine play may be a universal part o f g r o w i n g up as a boy. H o w e v e r , there is strong evidence that masculine socialization for men and feminine socialization for w o m e n predicts marital relationship expectations and commitment levels. B e i n g exposed to gender appropriate socializing agents, and neutral toys for w o m e n ,  teaches  children about the relationship roles they should expect i n adulthood. W o m e n ' s traditional roles include mamtaining the emotional climate i n marriages, w h i c h mirrors the findings o f this study. These early socializing agents c o u l d be reflections o f the gender roles that were instilled i n the respondents i n childhood. Specific toys such as dolls and dollhouses teach w o m e n to  61 expect to be i n v o l v e d i n maintaining their marriages, w h i l e the lack o f these toys i n m e n ' s development  may  inhibit the  sense o f obligation to take responsibility for  relationship  maintenance. R e s e a r c h has s h o w n that neutral toy p l a y is encouraged more often i n girls than in boys (e.g., C a l d e r a et a l . , 1989). N o t only are girls encouraged to play more frequently w i t h neutral toys, and mothers p l a y more frequently w i t h neutral toys w i t h their children (Idle et a l . , 1993). M o t h e r s ' neutral toy play serves as a m o d e l o f feminine-typed behavior. I n the case o f being committed to future marital roles, neutral toy play is associated w i t h higher role commitment for w o m e n . These results f o l l o w the findings from previous research, and emphasize the role o f neutral toys i n feminine socialization. P l a y i n g more frequently w i t h neutral toys for m e n is associated w i t h being less committed to future employment and careers. T h e 'feminine' nature o f the neutral toys suggests that more exposure to these toys for boys teaches feminine roles, or fewer masculine roles. Commitment to careers is traditionally a masculine role, and increased exposure to neutral play is related to a decrease i n the desire to maintain a career for men. These findings then pose more questions about the definition o f neutral toys. I f neutral toys are encouraged  more  for  girls, and  less  for boys,  and  considering the  findings  regarding  occupational commitment for men, then neutral toys may be another description for feminine toys. N e u t r a l toys may be a term that describes feminine toys that do not h o l d the same degree o f feminine qualities as feminine toys, but are  categorically recognized as  being  more  appropriate for girls than for boys. The implications o f the findings regarding neutral toy play add to the complexity o f defining and testing gender i n s o c i a l research. The feminization o f neutral toy play also suggests that masculinity and femininity are not absolute categories along a dichotomous dimension, but can be conceptualized i n v a r y i n g degrees. I f neutral toys are milder forms o f feminine toys, then the question o f what is defined as a milder form o f  62 masculine toys also arises. P l a y i n g w i t h parents also raises some questions about h o w gender roles are being taught and learned. T o date, it is k n o w n that fathers w i l l choose sex-typed toys i n play situations more often that mothers, w h o prefer neutral toys (Idle et a l . , 1993); these play interactions w i t h toys teach children about gender roles (Schwartz & M a r h a m , 1985). F o r the men i n the study, the more they p l a y e d w i t h mothers, the more committed they were to their future careers as w e l l as their marital roles. P l a y i n g w i t h their fathers was slightly related to l o w e r occupational commitment, and higher marital commitment. It can be hypothesized that for boys w h o play more often w i t h their mothers, less importance o n maintaining a career and more emphasis on marital roles may be taught. F o r the fathers w h o spent more time playing w i t h their sons, they could have been stepping out o f their role as the family ' b r e a d w i n n e r ' to emphasize the importance o f h a v i n g other roles, such as a stronger involvement i n parenting. F o r girls, more time spent w i t h fathers is associated w i t h l o w e r occupational commitment. This association might stem from gender-appropriate play that fathers engage i n , w h i c h emphasizes gender roles and w o u l d educate girls o n their future roles as w o m e n . P l a y i n g more w i t h fathers i n c h i l d h o o d also predicts stronger desires for parenting roles i n w o m e n . The more time spent w i t h fathers i n c h i l d h o o d is related to higher parenting expectations. L i n d s e y and M i z e (2001) found the context o f the parent-child interactions is also important factors i n parent-child gender socialization. T h e context o f the play situations respondents h a d w i t h their parents, especially w i t h their fathers, may an important variable that can explain the findings from this study. P l a y i n g w i t h both parents increases the desire for m e n to maintain their future homes; however, the home care role dimension can be interpreted as either a traditionally female or a traditionally male task. The nature o f these questions does not specify what type o f home care  63 is desired to maintain. The context o f the upkeep o f the home is debatable, as the traditionally feminine context resides within the home (laundry, cleaning, cooking) and the traditionally masculine context is centered around the exterior o f the home ( l a w n care, garbage, painting, roofing). The desire for commitment to home care roles m a y be l i n k e d to the contextual research, where L i n d s e y and M i z e (2001) found that parents choose to interact w i t h their children i n sex-typed contexts. B o t h mothers  and fathers  m a y have contributed to their  children's commitment levels to home care b y defining certain home care tasks as being sextyped. F o r example, mothers m a y emphasize the necessity for a clean house, and fathers m a y emphasize the need for regular l a w n care. Gender ideologies and gender schemas are important variables that were considered i n the execution o f this study. The extent to w h i c h one defines their o w n masculinity and femininity as w e l l as one's interpretations o f what appropriate gender roles are, both account for adulthood career choices and expectations. Just as sex-typed toys cannot be considered as perfect predictors o f adulthood gender-related decisions, gender ideologies and schemas cannot be considered as perfect mediators. Neither schemas nor ideologies are found to mediate a l l o f the tested relationships. G e n d e r schemas and gender role ideologies are also cannot be defined as perfect mediators. F o r example, gender schemas mediate both relationships between w o m e n w h o p l a y e d more w i t h feminine toys and for m e n w h o p l a y e d more w i t h masculine toys to their expected levels o f marital commitment. Personal reports o f masculine and feminine traits account for some respondents' marital commitment levels. Gender ideologies explain part o f the relationship between m e n playing more w i t h feminine toys i n c h i l d h o o d and their increased l i k e l i h o o d o f enrolling i n female dominated majors i n university. T h e fact that the mediating effects for both gender ideologies and schemas are not consistent over adulthood outcomes or for both genders reiterates the complexity o f the concept o f gender and is not easily quantified  64 or measured. G e n d e r development and socialization are difficult to describe i n finite terms o f development  processes.  The  mediating  relationships  exemplify  the  fact  that  gender  socialization is dependent u p o n many different variables and factors, as w e l l as context. T o understand the process o f h o w gender schemas and ideologies affect adulthood decisions i n relation to early c h i l d h o o d socialization, the findings o f the tested  mediated  relationships must be understood. Thus far, it has been found that gender ideologies do not mediate w o m e n ' s relationships between any c h i l d h o o d sex-typed toy and game play and any o f the tested adulthood outcomes, nor any o f the relationships between p l a y i n g w i t h parents and adulthood outcomes. M e n ' s gender ideologies have some mediating effects between  the  frequencies o f c h i l d h o o d feminine toy play to both enrolling i n female dominated majors, as w e l l as to their commitment to being parents. The relationship between neutral toy play enrolling i n female dominated majors is also mediated b y men's  and  gender ideologies. The  relationships between playing w i t h both parents to enrolling i n female dominated majors and to b e i n g less committed to careers and more committed to marital roles are mediated b y gender ideologies for men. M e n ' s ideas o f what appropriate gender roles are can explain only some o f these relationships, i n contrast w i t h the l a c k o f influence ideologies have for  women's  adulthood outcomes. F o r men, gender role ideologies are important factors i n gender-related adulthood career decisions, and not for w o m e n . G e n d e r schemas do have a mediating effect on the w o m e n ' s correlation between p l a y i n g more w i t h feminine and neutral toys and being more committed to marital roles. M e n are more influenced b y their gender schemas than w o m e n are w h e n describing their career and family  expectations.  Men's  relationships  between  feminine  play  and  home  care  role  commitment, neutral play and enrolling i n female majors, and masculine play and occupational and marital commitments are a l l influenced b y their gender schemas. M e n ' s c h i l d h o o d gender  65 socialization and adulthood outcomes are affected by their sense of masculinity and femininity, and in more contexts than for women. In general, men's academic paths and career and family expectations are dependent upon both their gender ideologies and their gender schemas. In comparison, gender schemas affect only some of women's adulthood outcomes, while their gender role ideologies are not influential variables in those relationships. To conclude, it is apparent from this study that early childhood gender socialization matters where adulthood academic and career paths are concerned. The gender of the individual, their time spent playing with sex-typed toys and their parents, as well as the specific outcomes are important variables in the socialization process. Personal perceptions of masculinity and femininity as well as gender ideologies explain some of these relationships, and more so for men than for women. It is also evident that the path from early childhood gender socialization to adulthood gender-based decisions is not direct. The complexity of the path of gender socialization is related to the complexity of the concept of gender itself, where the concept has yet to be clearly defined and understood. Limitations A select number of relationships that did not reach statistical significance were reported in the results section. Relationships that had a p level between .05 and .10 "were reported. These relationships were reported and considered to be important to the models tested for several reasons. The participants were not randomly selected from their population, as the respondents voluntarily participated in the study. The sample in the study is not a representative sample of the population as all are university students, and the majority of them are in their third and fourth years of study. This non-probability sample creates limitations to inference of findings to a population beyond the sample in the study. The results of this study are confined to the selected the sample. These results may occur only within the tested sample. The sample size of  66 each gender category is a likely contributor to the fact that some relationships d i d not reach significance. The male sample was smaller than the female sample. T h e concepts o f masculinity and fernininity can also raise some concerns. The concepts o f masculinity and feniininity within this study are based o n previous literature that defines gender i n their o w n w o r d s . F o r example, to B e r n (1981, 1983) the concept o f being ' m a s c u l i n e ' is relevant to a coefficient that is derived from the number o f feminine and masculine traits the individual reports o w n i n g . B y quantifying their traits, the B S R I can give a r a w score to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s perceptions o f their o w n sense o f masculinity and fennninity, and place their score o n a gender continuum to describe their gender.  Gender ideologies are simply measures o f  h o w the individual assumes social roles are appropriate for both sexes. The measure o f a feminine career path w i t h i n this study is the number o f female students i n a declared university specialization. W h i l e these examples define facets o f the concept o f gender, each c a n also be considered as being separate from the other. T h e discrepancy i n the continuity o f the definitions o f gender c a n be a limitation o f the research, as they m a y not be defining the exact same concept. B o t h theoretical perspectives approach the concept o f gender as being a categorical concept, and not fluid. This limits the findings as this approach implies that gender c a n be sorted into discrete categories, further i m p l y i n g that there is no overlap between the categories. A p p l y i n g a fluid approach to the concept o f gender m a y have y i e l d e d different results and definitions o f sex-typed behaviors. This is an issue for a l l gender research, but also defines the variations that are seen w i t h i n gender itself. This study m a y be m i s s i n g any n e w definitions o f gender currently h e l d by the participants o f the study, as w e l l as the cultural definitions h e l d within the community o f the participants. Certain variables that contribute to the gender socialization development from infancy to adulthood cannot be measured w i t h i n the parameters o f this study. Effects o f the media, such  67 as television, video games, internet and magazines are factors that cannot be measured i n this p r o p o s e d research. Despite research that indicates the importance o f the f a m i l y ' s influence o n childhood socialization (e.g., M a c c o b y , 1992), the importance o f increasing external m e d i a influences cannot be captured i n this m o d e l . Some unique variables i n individual families are other limitations. W h i l e this study c a n ask about the number and sex o f siblings, the effects o f these factors cannot be measured. H a v i n g older sisters as opposed to being the oldest brother or c o m i n g from a cultural system that has different expectations for gender appropriate behavior c o u l d mediate  the  influences o f family  and mainstream cultures. Personality and  other  individual variations are also other possible factors i n the m o d e l . T h e retrospective nature o f the study also creates some concern over the reliability o f the accounts o f toy and p l a y styles. Respondents w i l l be asked about details o f their lives from over 15 years ago. These detailed events act as cued recall, w h i c h helps the retrieval o f memories that have been stored for periods o f time. E n g a g i n g i n recall facilitates more recall w i t h similar information ( S c h w a r z , H i p p l e r , & N o e l l e - N e u m a n n , 1 9 9 4 ) . The questions i n the survey are designed to act as c u e d recall, instead o f open-ended responses, and the questions regarding toys and p l a y i n childhood are similar, and should thus m a k e the memory retrieval o f childhood p l a y experiences more readily available. T h e reliability o f the G i u l i a n o et al. (2000) study indicates that this method is acceptable. G i l m a r t i n (1987) also conducted a retrospective study where male respondents were asked i f they p l a y e d w i t h masculine a n d feminine toys w h e n they were 5 a n d 12 years o f age. The range o f ages o f the respondents  ranged from  19 to 50 years o f age.  These  respondents were asked to recall toys they h a d as long as 45 years prior to the study. These studies are only t w o examples o f h o w research uses recall to get an account o f c h i l d h o o d experiences. O v e r a l l , normative c h i l d h o o d experiences are reliably recalled ( M a u g h a n &  68 Rutter, 1997). Adults appear to be reliable in their accounts of their episodic memories, which includes childhood memories. However, normative memory decay and distortions are variables that cannot be measured in this study. Forgetting events and not remembering events accurately are common issues in retrospective recall. For example, forgetting about certain toys one had, and distortions such as highly emotional events are factors that cannot be controlled for. Maughan and Rutter (1997) point out that questionnaires have been found to generate more accurate and detailed responses than interviews in some cases. While some recalled information may be forgotten or distorted, toys and friendships that had significant meaning in childhood are memorable experiences. Gender schemas may also affect the retrospective nature of this study, and could affect the validity of recalling childhood experiences. Gender schemas act as information processors that organize information into gender categories, and could thus create false recollections of the frequency of play with toys, parents, and games. For example, highly sex-typed individuals may readily recall childhood play that congruent with their gender more than cross-gender play. The accuracy of recalling gender-related information may be subject to individuals' salience of their own gender schemas. Neither gender ideologies nor gender schemas can be considered as perfect mediators between early parent-child gender socialization and adulthood career and academic outcomes. There are many other external and mediating factors that were outside of the parameters of this study that could affect adulthood career choices and expectations. Gender schemas appear to have more of a mediating effect on the relationships between childhood gender socialization and adulthood academic and career paths and expectations. The sense of holding masculine and feminine traits can explain more relationships between sex-typed childhood gender socialization and holding traditional and non-traditional expectations about future career and  69  family roles, compared to gender role ideologies. Ideologies about how the genders should behave are not as strong a variable in the gender socialization process. Despite the degree of the impact of gender ideologies and gender schemas as mediators, it is important to note that both affect certain aspect of the gender socialization process.  70  References Amatea,, E . S . , C r o s s , E . G . , C l a r k , J . E . & B o b b y , C . L . (1986). A s s e s s i n g the w o r k and family expectations o f career oriented men and w o m e n : T h e L i f e R o l e Salience Scales. Journal Marriage and the Family, 48, 831-831. B a r o n , R . M . & K e n n y , D . A . (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction i n social p s y c h o l o g i c a l research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal Personality and Social Psychology,  of  51,1173-1182.  Bern, S . L . (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account o f sex typing.  Psychological  Review, 88, 354-364. Bern, S . L . (1983). Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: R a i s i n g gender-aschematic  children i n a gender-schematic  society. Journal  of  Women in  Culture and Society, 8, 599-616. B r i d g e m a n , B . & W e n d l e r , C . (1991). Gender differences i n predictors o f college mathematics  performance  Educational Psychology,  and i n college mathematics  course  grades.  Journal  of  83,275-284.  Caldera, Y . M . , H u s t o n , A . C . & O ' B r i e n , M . (1989). S o c i a l interactions and play patterns o f parents and toddlers w i t h feminine, masculine, and neutral toys. Child Development, 60, 70-76. C o n n e l l , R . W . (1995). Masculinities.  C a m b r i d g e , U K : P o l i t y Press.  C o n n o r , J . M . , Serbin, L . A . , & Shackman, M . (1977). Sex differences i n children's response to training on visual-spatial test. Developmental Psychology, 13, 293-294. C o n n o r , J . M . , S c h a c k m a n , M . , & Serbin, L . A . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Sex-related differences i n response to practice o n a visual-spatial test and generalization to a related test. Child Development,  71 49, 24-29. E a g l y , A . L . , W o o d , W . , & D i e k m a n , A . B . (2000). S o c i a l role theory o f sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T . E c c l e s & H . M . Trautner (Eds.), The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender (pp.123-174). M a h w a h , N J : L a w r e n c e E r l b a u m Associates. E c c l e s , J . S. (1987). Gender roles ans w o m e n ' s achievement-related decisions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 135-172. Eisenberg, N . , W o l c h i k , S . A . , Hernandez, R . & Pasternack, J . F . (1985). Parental socialization o f y o u n g children's play: A short-term longitudinal study. Child Development,  56,  1509-1513. Fagot, B . I. (1974). S e x differences i n toddlers' behavior and parental reaction. Developmental Psychology, 10, 554-558. Fagot, B . I . & H a g a n , R . (1991). Observations o f parent reactions to sex-stereotyped behaviors: A g e a n d sex effects. Child Development,  62,617-628.  Fagot, B . I . & L e i n b a c h , M . D . (1989). T h e y o u n g c h i l d ' s gender schema: E n v i r o n m e n t a l input, internal organizations. Child Development, 60), 663-672. Fagot, B . I.. & L e i n b a c h , M . D . (1987) Socialization o f sex roles w i t l i i n the family. In D . B . Carter (Ed.), Current Conceptions of Sex Roles and Sex Typing (pp.89-100). N e w Y o r k , N Y : Praeger Publishers. Fiese, B . H . & S k i l l m a n , G . (2000). Gender differences i n family stories: M o d e r a t i n g influence o f parent gender role a n d c h i l d gender. Sex Roles, 43, 267-283. Fisher-Thompson, D . (1993). A d u l t toy purchases for children: Factors affecting sex-typed toy selection. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 385-406. F i s h e r - T h o m p s o n , D . (1990). A d u l t sex-typing o f children's toys. Sex Roles, 23, 291-303.  72 Gilmartin, B . G . (1987). Shyness and Love: Causes, Consequences and Treatment. N e w Y o r k , N Y : University Press o f A m e r i c a . G i u l i a n o , T . A . , P o p p , K . E . & K n i g h t , J . L . (2000). Footballs versus B a r b i e dolls: C h i l d h o o d play activities as predictors o f sport participation. Sex Roles,  42,159-181.  Hoffman, R . M . & B o r d e r s , L . D . (2001). Twenty-five years after the Bern Sex R o l e Inventory: A reassessment and n e w issues regarding classification variability. Measurement  &  Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 34, 39-50. H o l m b e c k , G . N . (1997). T o w a r d terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity i n the study of  moderators  and  mediators:  Examples  form  the  child-clinical  and  pediatric  psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599-610. Idle, T . , W o o d , E . & Desmarais, S. (1993). G e n d e r role socialization i n toy p l a y situations: M o t h e r s and fathers w i t h their sons and daughters. Sex Roles,  28,679-691.  J a c k s o n , L . A . , Gardner, P . D . & Sullivan, L . A . (1992). E x p l a i n i n g gender differences i n selfpay expectations: Social comparison standards o f fair pay. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 651 -663. L a n g l o i s , J . H . & D o w n s , A . C . (1980). M o t h e r s , fathers, and peers as socialization agents o f sex-typed play behaviors i n y o u n g children. Child Development, 51, 1217-1247. L e w k o , J . H . , H e i n , C , G a r g , R . , & Tesson, G . (1993). Transitions o f adolescents i n science career pathways. In: P . A n i s e f & P . A x e l r o d ( E d s ) , Transitions:  Schooling  and  Employment in Canada. Toronto: T h o m p s o n Educational Publishing. L i n d s e y , E . W . & M i z e , J . (2001). Contextual differences i n parent-child play: Implications for children's gender role development. Sex Roles,  46,155-175.  L i s s , M . B . (1983). L e a r n i n g gender-related skills through play. In M . B . L i s s (Ed.), Social and Cognitive Skills: Sex Roles and Children's Play. San Fransisco, C A : A c a d e m i c Press.  73 L e v y , G . D . (1999). Gender-typed and non-gender-typed category awareness i n toddlers. Sex Roles, 41, 851-873. L y s o n , T . A . (1984). S e x differences i n the choice o f a male or female career line: A n analysis o f b a c k g r o u n d characteristics and w o r k values. Work and Occupations,  11,131-146.  M a c c o b y , E . E . ( 1 9 9 2 ) . T h e role o f parents i n the socialization o f children: A n historical overview. Developmental Psychology,  28,1006-1016.  M a c c o b y , E . E . & J a c k l i n C . N . (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences.  Stanford, C A :  Stanford University Press. M a u g h a n , B . & Rutter, M . (1997). Retrospective reporting o f childhood adversity: Issues i n assessing long-term recall. Journal of Personality Disorders,  11,19-33.  M c C u t c h e n e o n , L . E . (1998). L i f e R o l e Salience Scales: A d d i t i o n a l evidence for construct validity. Psychological Reports, 83, 1307-1314. M c H u g h , M . C . & H a n s o n F r i e z e , I. (1997). T h e measurement o f gender role attitudes: A review a n d commentary. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 1-16. O ' B r i e n , M . & Huston, A . C . (1985). Development o f sex-typed play behavior i n toddlers. Developmental Psychology, 21, 866-871. Pomerleau, A . , B o l d u c , D . , M a l c u i t , G . & Cossette, L . (1990). P i n k or blue: E n v i r o n m e n t a l gender stereotypes i n the first years o f life. Sex Roles, 22, 356-367. Roopnarine, J . L . (1986). M o t h e r s ' a n d fathers' behaviors toward the toy play o f their infant sons a n d daughters. Sex Roles, 14, 59-68. Roopnarine, J . L . & M o u n t s , N . S . (1987). Current theoretical issues i n sex roles and sex typing. In D . B . Carter ( E d . ) , Current Conceptions of Sex Roles and Sex Typing (pp.7-32). N e w Y o r k , N Y : Praeger Publishers. R u b l e , D . N . & M a r t i n , C L . (1998). G e n d e r development. Handbook of Child  Psychology:  74 Socialization,  Personality, and Social Development ( V o l . 5, pp. 993-1016). N e w Y o r k :  Wiley. Schroeder, K . A . & M a l u s o , D . (1993). Gender differences and similarities between male and female undergraduate  students regarding expectations  for career and family roles.  College Student Journal, 27, 237-249. Schwartz, L . A . & M a r k h a m , W . T . (1985). S e x differences i n children's toy advertisements. Sex Roles, 12, 157-170. Signorella, M . L . , Jamison, W . , & K r u p a , M . H . ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Predicting spatial performance gender  stereotyping  i n activity preferences  and i n self  concept.  from  Developmental  Psychology, 25, 89-95. Sparfkin, C , Serbin, L . A . , D e n i e r C . ,  & C o n n o r , J . M . (1983). Sex-differentiated play:  Cognitive consequences and early c h i l d h o o d interventions. In. M . A . L i s s ( E d . ) , Social and Cognitive Skills: Sex Roles and Children's  Play. S a n Fransisco, C A : A c a d e m i c  Press. Spence, J . T . & H a h n , E . D . (1997). T h e Attitudes T o w a r d W o m e n Scale and attitude change i n college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 17-32. Spence, J . , T . , H e l m r e i c h , R . & Stapp, J . (1973) A short version o f the Attitudes T o w a r d W o m e n Scale ( A W S ) . Bulletin of Psychonomic Society, 2, 219-220. T i l l e c z e k , K . C . & L e w k o , J . H . (2001). Factors influencing the pursuit o f health and science careers for Canadian adolescents i n transition from school to w o r k . Journal of Youth Studies, 4 , 4 1 5 - 4 2 8 . W a r e , N . C . & L e e , V . E . ( 1988). S e x differences i n choice o f college science majors. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 593-614. W e s t , C , & Z i m m e r m a n , D . H . (1987). D o i n g gender. Gender & Society,  1,125-151.  76 Parti : Background information  1. What is your gender?  Female  Male  2. What category best describes your background? Check ( X) ONE: North American  Eastern European  South American  Middle Eastern  Central American  Asian  African  South East Asian  Western European  Australian Other:  3. How old are you?  Years  4. What is your parents' Highest Level of Education? Please put a check one box for EACH parent: MOTHER'S highest level of education:  FATHER'S highest level of education:  Some Highschool  Some Highschool  Highschool Diploma  Highschool Diploma  Some Post Secondary  Some Post Secondary  University/College Degree  University/College Degree  Post-Graduate Degree(MD.,PhD.,Law...)  Post-Graduate Degree(MD.,PhD..)  5. What type of occupations do your parents currently hold? If they are retired, what was the last position they held? MOTHER'S Occupation  FATHER'S Occupation  Business/Finance/Administration  Business/Finance/Administration  Trades/Transport/Equipment Operations  Trades/Transport/Equipment Operations  Science Related (Chemist, Social...)  Science Related (Chemist, Social...)  Management Occupation  Management Occupation  Sales and Service  Sales and Service  Health Occupation  Health Occupation  Stay at Home  Stay at Home  Other  Other  77 What is the Title of your mother's occupation?  (Ex: Nurse, doctor  )  What is the Title of your father's occupation?  6. What academic year are you currently in? First  Second  Third  Fourth Other  7.a) Have you declared your major (specialization)?  Yes  No  7.b)What major (specialization) have you declared? (Ex.: Psychology, Marketing, Nursing...). If you have not declared a major, please indicate what major you will be declaring:  8 . Which Degree Program are you pursuing? Check one:  |  | Bachelor of Science  1 I Bachelor of Medical Lab Sciences  [^Bachelor of Applied Sciences  |  | Bachelor of Midwifery  [^Bachelorof Sci.(Natural Res.Cns.)  |  | Bachelor of Music  |  | Bachelor of Science (Agroecology)  Bachelor of Arts 1 Bachelor of Commerce  I Bachelor of Science (Global Rpsourpps)  |  | Bachelor of Education (Elementary)  O Bachelor of Science (FNH)  |  [ Bachelor of Education (Middle)  [ [ Bachelor of Science (Forestry)  EZ1 Bachelor of Education (Secondary)  |  I I Bachelor of Environmental Design  [ | Bachelor of Science (Phys. Thrpy.)  I | Bachelor of Fine Arts  |  [ Bachelor of Science (Nursing)  [ | Bachelor of Human Kinetics  |  | Bachelor of Science Pharmacy  |  |  | Bachelor of Social Work  •  | Bachelor of Laws Other:  | Bachelor of Science (Occup. Thrpy.)  78 Part 2: Personality Measures 9. Directions: For the following words listed below, rate the extent to which you think the trait (word) describers you. Write the number in the box next to each word to indicate your response. Use the scale provided: EXAMPLE: Emotional  1 Almost never true  1  2 Usually not true  2  3  4  5  6  3 Sometimes,but Infrequently true  7  1  Aggressive  4 Occasionally true  5 Often true  2  3  4  5  6  6 Usually true  7  7 Almost always  Defend M y Own Beliefs  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Affectionate  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Conscientious  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Independent  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Sympathetic  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Moody  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Assertive  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Sensitive to needs of others  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Reliable  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Strong Personality  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Understanding  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Jealous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Forceful  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Compassionate  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Truthful  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Have leadership abilities  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  79  1 Almost never true  2  3  Usually not true  Sometimes,but Infrequently true  4  2  5  Occasionally true  Eager to soothe hurt feelings  1  Secretive  1  2  3  Willing to take risks  1  2  Warm  1  Adaptable  4  7  Usually true  Almost always  7  5  6  4  5  6  7  3  4  5  6  7  2  3  4  5  6  7  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Dominant  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Tender  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Conceited  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Willing to take a stand  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Love children  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Tactful  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Aggressive  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Gentle  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Conventional  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Please go to the next page!  3  6  Often true  80 10. Indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements. Please C I R C L E the number that corresponds to you response according to the following scale.  Disagree  1  Somewhat Disagree 2  Neither Disagree Nor Agree 3  Somewhat Agree  Agree  4  5  I want to work, but do not want to have a demanding career.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to make many sacrifices as necessary in order to advance my career.  1  2  3  4  5  I value being involved in a career and expect to devote the time and efforts needed to develop it.  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to devote my time to the rearing of my children.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to be very involved in the day-to-day matters of rearing children of my own.  1  2  3  4  5  Becoming involved in the day-to-day care details of rearing children involves costs in other areas of my life which I am unwilling to make.  1  2  3  4  5  I do not expect to be very involved in child rearing.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to commit whatever time is necessary to making my marriage partner feel loved.  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to devote a significant amount of my time to building my future career and developing the necessary skills to advance it. I expect to devote whatever time and energy it takes to move up in my future career field. It is important to me to have some time for myself and my own development rather than have children and be responsible for their care.  Devoting a significant amount of my time to being with or doing things with a marriage partner is not something I expect to do. I expect to put a lot of time and effort into building and maintaining a marital relationship. Really involving myself in a marriage relationship involves costs in other areas which I am not willing to accept.  81 Disagree 1  Somewhat Disagree 2  Neither Disagree Nor Agree 3  Somewhat Agree  Agree  4  I expect to work hard to build a good marriage relationship even if it means limiting my opportunities to pursue other personal goals.  1  2  5  3  4  5  I expect to leave most of the day-to-day details of running a home to someone else.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to devote the necessary time and attention to having a neat and attractive home.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to be very much involved in caring for a home and making it attractive.  1  2  3  4  5  I expect to assume the responsibility for seeing that my home is well kept and well run.  1  2  3  4  5  Devoting a significant amount of my time to managing and caring for a home is not something I care to do.  1  2  3  4  5  11. The statements listed below describe attitudes toward the roles of women in society which different people have. Please indicate the extent to which Y O U agree with each statement. Circle the number that corresponds with the following scale:  Strongly Disagree  1  Disagree Mildly  Agree Mildly  2  Strongly Agree  4  3 1  2  1  2  3  4  It is insulting to have the "obey" clause remain in the marriage service.  1  2  3  4  A woman should be free as a man to propose marriage.  1  2  3  4  Women should worry less about their rights and more about becoming good wives and mothers.  1  2  3  Swearing and obscenity are more repulsive in the speech of a women, rather than of a man. Under modern economic conditions with women being active outside the home, men should share in the household tasks such as washing the dishes and doing laundry.  3  4  4  82 Strongly Disagree  Disagree Mildly  1  Strongly Agree  Agree Mildly  2  Women should assume their rightful place in business and all professions along with men. Women should not expect to go to exactly the same places or to have quite the same freedom of action as a man.  4  3  1  1  3  2  3  2  4  4  It is ridiculous for a woman to drive a train and for man to knit a sweater.  1  2  3  4  The intellectual leadership of a community should be largely in the hands of men.  1  2  3  4  Women should be given equal opportunity with men for apprenticeship in the various trades.  1  3  4  Women earning as much as their dates should bear equally the expense when they go out together.  1  Sons in a family should be given more encouragement to go to college than daughters.  1  In general, the father should have greater authority than the mother in the bringing up of children.  1  Economic and social freedom is worth far more to a woman than acceptance of the ideal femininity which has been set up by men. There are many jobs in which men should be given preference over women in being hired or promoted.  Please go to the next page!  2  2  2  1  2  2  4  3  4  3  2  1  3  4  3  4  3  4  83 12. How often did you play with the following toys when you were younger? Using the scale below, please circle the number that corresponds to your response in the box next to each toy.  1 Never  2 Rarely  3  4  Occasionally  5  Often  Very Often  Toy Guns  1  2  3  4  5  Barbies  1  2  3  4  5  Dishes/Tea Sets  1  2  3  4  5  Army Toys & Soldiers  1  2  3  4  5  Weight Lifting Toys  1  2  3  4  5  Sewing Kits  1  2  3  4  5  Painting Sets  1  2  3  4  5  Baby Dolls  1  2  3  4  5  Doll House  1  2  3  4  5  Play Doh & Modelling Clay  1  2  3  4  5  Tools & Carpentry Sets  1  2  3  4  5  Balls(footballs, soccer balls, baseballs..)  1  2  3  4  5  Jewellery/ Jewellery Boxes  1  2  3  4  5  Cars/Trucks/Airplanes  1  2  3  4  5  84 13. When you were younger, how often did you play the following games? Using the scale below, please circle the number that corresponds to your response in the box next to each game. 1  2  Never  3  Rarely  4  Occasionally  5  Often  Very Often  House  1  2  3  4  5  Team Sports (soccer, baseball...)  1  2  3  4  5  "Teacher"  1  2  3  4  5  Video Games  1  2  3  4  5  "War"  1  2  3  4  5  Dress-up  1  2  3  4  5  Make-Believe or Pretend  1  2  3  4  5  Jump Rope  1  2  3  4  5  Hopscotch  1  2  3  4  5  .  14. Think back to when you were a young child, when you were in the ages between preschool and first grade. How often did you PLAY WITH: Never 1  Rarely 2  Occasionally 3  Often 4  Very Often 5  BOYS  1  2  3  4  5  GIRLS  1  2  3  4  5  MOTHER  1  2  3  4  5  FATHER  1  2  3  4  5  85 Thank you for your participation! Katherine Rhodes will come to your next class to pick up this survey. If for some reason you didn't bring this survey to that time, please either place this survey in the self addressed and postage paid envelope provided and put it in the mail,or, email Katherine Rhodes, and she will arrange to pick up this completed survey.  86  Appendix B  Table 12  Mean Response Scores Variable  WOMEN  MEN  Feminine Toy Play*  3.28  1.31  Feminine Game Play*  3.66  2.01  Masculine Toy Play*  2.20  3.42  Masculine Game Play*  2.53  3.73  Neutral Toy Play*  3.91  3.33  Frequency of Play with Mother *  3.36  3.12  Frequency of Play with Father*  2.84  3.10  Occupational Role Commitment*  3.67  3.87  Parental Role Commitment *  3.76  3.65  Marital Role Commitment*  4.33  4.30  Home Care Role Commitment*  3.71  3.57  Gender Ideology ( A T W ) * *  3.48  3.26  Gender Schema (BSRl)t  3.49  -1.92  Note: *five point scale; **four point scale; f standardized t score; n = 277  87 Table 13 Regressions Between Childhood Socialization Variables and Mediators  Independent Variable  Gender Ideologies B B  Gender Schemas B  Overall Feminine Toys and Games  .11**  K  .14  Masculine Toys and Games  -.06|  2  R  .08  Neutral Toy Play  .10**  R  .11  Playing with Mother  .06**  R  .09  Playing with Father  .01  R2  .07  2  2  2  .28  3.15**  .25  .07 -.11  -3.83**  -.24  .06 .22  2.57**  .18  .03 .16  1.11  .09  .01 .04  -.94  -.08  .01  Note. All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; tP^O.10; *ps0.050; **p<0.0\,n —  277.  88  Table 14 Women's and Men's Regressions Between Childhood Socialization Variables and Mediating Variables  Independent Variable  Gender Ideologies B  Gender Schemas B  6  B  WOMEN Feminine Toys and Games  .06  3.09*  R  .09  .04  Masculine Toys and Games  .11*  R  .11  2  2  Neutral Toy Play  .04  R  .08  2  Playing with Mother  .02  R  .08  2  Playing with Father  ,01  R  .08  2  .17  -2.60  .16  .12  .03 .08  1.57  .10  .02 .06  .65  .06  .01 -.05  -1.20  -.10  .02  MEN Feminine Toys and Games  .15  R  .09  Masculine Toys and Games  .00  R  .06  2  2  Neutral Toy Play  .12**  R  .13  Playing with Mother  .10*  R  .12  2  2  Playing with Father  .10*  R  .12  2  .15  5.52f  .19  .05 .00  -4.02t  -.19  .05 .26  2.40  .17  .04 .24  1.20 .02  .25  .16  .01  .01  Note. All regressions controlled for parent education and employment variables; fp^O.10; *p<0.050; **p<0.01, Women: n = 175; Men: n = 102.  Table 15 Correlations Between all Independent and Dependent Variables  1.  Variables  2.  3.  4.  5.  6.  8.  7.  10.  9.  11.  12.  1. Feminine Toys and Games 2. Masculine Toys and Games  -.50  3. Neutral Toy Play  .43  -.06  4. Play with Mother  .19  .01  .26  5. Play with Father  -.03  .19  .18  .52  6. Percent Female Enrollment  .41  -.28  .20  .04  -.02  7. Occupational Role Comm.  -.10  .16  -.13  -.09  -.12  -.07  8. Parenting Role Comm.  .07  -.03  .12  .08  .18  .12  -.09  9. Marital Role Comm.  .07  -.07  .05  .13  .08  .08  -.01  .41  10. Home Care Role Comm.  .11  -.10  .10  .16  .15  .06  -.05  .26  .27  11. Gender Role Ideologies  .27  -.11  .24  .16  .06  .23  .02  -.03  .01  -.07  12. Gender Schemas  .25  -.25  .17  .08  -.07  .17  -.11  .18  .17  .14  .18  oo CO  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 54 66
Canada 51 11
United Kingdom 34 0
Turkey 5 0
Morocco 5 0
Hong Kong 5 2
Pakistan 5 0
Philippines 4 0
Ireland 4 0
Zimbabwe 3 0
China 3 8
Japan 3 0
Croatia 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 96 28
Washington 18 0
Canterbury 9 0
Ashburn 6 0
Central District 5 0
Toronto 5 0
Lowell 4 0
Tokyo 3 0
Whiteland 3 1
Izmir 2 0
Beckenham 2 0
Bellevue 2 1
Snohomish 2 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0091959/manifest

Comment

Related Items