The effects of sex and sex-role identity on the attribution of maladjustment

Abstract

This study examined the effects of a stimulus person's gender and sex-role identity and an observer's gender and sex-role identity on the observer's judgments of the stimulus person's personality and level of adjustment. After having been classified as androgynous or nonandrogynous, 141 males and females viewed videotapes of a case conference on a bogus client. In the videotapes the client's gender and sex-role identity were factorially manipulated. As predicted, male clients and clients with a masculine sex-role identity were seen as possessing less favorable personality characteristics and as being less mentally healthy than were female clients and clients with a feminine history. Sex-role incongruence (e.g., a masculine female) influenced the subjects' judgments only of a female client. A sex-role congruent female was seen as more attractive and better adjusted than a sex-role incongruent female. The subjects' gender and sex-role identity did not influence their judgments of the clients in any consistent or interpretable fashion. Finally, it was found that the subjects were most influenced by sex-role congruence/incongruence of opposite sex stimulus persons. The discussion of these results centered on: (a) the relative influence of gender and sex-role identity on people's perceptions of a stimulus person and (b) the need for further exploration of how subject characteristics might influence these perceptions.