| Title |
Accessibility of Gender Stereotype Domains: Developmental and Gender Differences in Children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sex Roles, January 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11199-009-9584-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cindy Faith Miller, Leah E. Lurye, Kristina M. Zosuls, Diane N. Ruble |
| Abstract |
The present research examined developmental and gender differences in the relative accessibility of different gender stereotype domains. A 1988 Northeastern US sample of 256 children ages 3 to 10 years old provided open-ended descriptions of girls and boys. Responses were coded by domain to examine differences by grade, gender of participant, and gender of target. Analyses revealed that girls and older children provided a higher proportion of stereotypes, and that appearance stereotypes were particularly prevalent in descriptions of girls and activity/trait stereotypes were more prevalent in descriptions of boys. Results are discussed in terms of implications for research on the stereotype knowledge-behavior link and the need for more attention to the role of appearance stereotypes in the gender stereotype literature. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 138 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 25 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
| Researcher | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 12% |
| Unknown | 29 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 72 | 51% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 13% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 11 | 8% |
| Unknown | 32 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,269,564
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Sex Roles
#1,467
of 2,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,674
of 171,425 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sex Roles
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 171,425 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.