Çocukların Toplumsal Cinsiyet Bağlamında Sosyal Dâhil Etme Yargıları

Mevcut çalışmanın amacı çocukların cinsiyet bağlamında sosyal dâhil etme yargılarını incelemektir. Bu amaçla, yetmişbeşi 10 yaş ve yetmiş beşi 13 yaş grubuna ait olmak üzere toplam 150 çocuğa, bir bale grubuna katılmak isteyen bir kızve bir oğlan karakter ile ilgili iki hikâye ve bu hikâyelerde eşit nitelikler ve eşit olmayan nitelikler olmak üzere iki koşulsunulmuştur. Çocukların sosyal dâhil etme kararlarını anlamak üzere hikâyelerdeki iki karakter arasından kimin grubadâhil edilmesi gerektiği sorulmuş, ardından bu kararlarının ardındaki gerekçelendirmeleri belirtmeleri istenmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre, eşit nitelikler koşulunda eşit derecede iyi bale yapan hikâyedeki bir kız karakter ve bir oğlankarakter arasından, daha sıklıkla kız karakter tercih edilmiş ve daha fazla kalıp yargı gerekçelendirmeleri yapılmıştır.Eşit olmayan nitelikler koşulunda ise çocuklar daha iyi bale yapan karakter olan oğlanı grup başarısını düşünerek dahasıklıkla tercih etmişlerdir. Ayrıca, eşit nitelikler koşulunda 10 yaş grubundaki çocuklar kız karakteri daha sıklıkla tercihedip daha fazla kalıp yargı gerekçelendirmeleri yaparken, 13 yaş grubu, oğlan karakteri daha sıklıkla tercih edip dahafazla ahlaki gerekçelendirmeler yapmıştır. Türkiye’de çocukların cinsiyet bağlamında sosyal dâhil etme yargılarını ilkdefa araştıran bu çalışma, toplumsal normların çocukların değerlendirmelerine önemli oranda etki ettiğine dair bilgilersunmaktadır.

Children’s Social Inclusion Judgments in the Context of Gender

In the present study, it was aimed to examine how children evaluate social inclusion in context of gender. In total, 150 children were recruited. Along with the two vignettes about a boy and a girl who both want to be part of a ballet group, these children were presented with two study conditions as having equal and unequal qualifications. In order to assess their decisions, children were asked whom to include, the girl or the boy, into the ballet group. Later on, they were also asked for the justifications of their decisions. According to the results, children included the girl more frequently and made more stereotyping justifications in the equal qualifications. In the unequal qualifications condition, they chose the boy, who is better at ballet, by referring the group functioning. Age differences were found in the equal qualifications condition. While 10-year-olds were more likely to choose the girl in the vignette by referring to stereotyping justifications, 13-year-olds were more likely to choose the boy in the vignette by making moral justifications. This study provides important insights by shedding light on how gender roles influence children’s social evaluations, and contributes to the literature by being the first study examining related judgments in the context of Turkish culture.

___

  • Abrams, D. (1985). Focus of attention in minimal intergroup discrimination. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 65–74.
  • Abrams, D., Hogg, M. A. ve Marques, J. M. (2005). A social psychological framework for understanding social inclusion and exclusion. D. Abrams, M. A. Hogg ve J. M. Marques (Der.), The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion içinde (1–23). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  • Arsel, C. O. ve Batıgün, A. D. (2011). İntihar ve cinsiyet: Cinsiyet rolleri, iletişim becerileri, sosyal destek ve umutsuzluk açısından bir değerlendirme. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 26(68), 1–10.
  • Aylaz, R., Güneş, G., Uzun, Ö. ve Ünal, S. (2014). Üniversite öğrencilerinin toplumsal cinsiyet rolüne yönelik görüşleri. STED/ Sürekli Tıp Eğitimi Dergisi, 23(5), 183–189.
  • Blakemore, J. E. O. (2003). Children’s beliefs about violating gender norms: Boys shouldn’t look like girls, and girls shouldn’t act like boys. Sex Roles, 48, 411–419. doi:10.1023/A:102357442772
  • Bodenhausen, G. V. ve Lichtenstein, M. (1987). Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: The impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 871–880.
  • Brenick, A. ve Killen, M. (2014). Moral judgments about Jewish-Arab intergroup exclusion: The role of cultural identity and contact. Developmental Psychology, 50, 86–99. doi:10.1037/a0034702
  • Ceylan, S., Doğulu, C. ve Akbaş, G. (2016). Namus adına kadına yönelik şiddete dair sosyal temsiller: Karma yöntemli bir çalışma. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 19, 64–72.
  • Conry-Murray, C. ve Turiel, E. (2012). Jimmy’s baby doll and Jenny’s truck: Young children’s reasoning about gender norms. Child Development, 83, 146– 158. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01696.x
  • Crick, N. R., Nelson, D. A., Morales, J. R., Cullerton-Sen, C., Casas, J. ve Hickman, S. E. (2001). Relational victimization in childhood and adolescence: I hurt you through the grapevine. J. Juvonen ve S. Graham (Der.), Peer harassment in school: The plight of the vulnerable and victimized içinde (196–214). New York: Guilford Press.
  • Çamaş, G. G. ve Meşe, G. (2016). Sosyal hiyerarşi: Cinsel şiddet mitlerini anlamak. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 31(78), 62–74.
  • Dovidio, J. F. ve Gaertner, S. L. (2006). A multilevel perspective on prejudice: Crossing disciplinary boundaries. P. A. M. van Lange (Der.), Bridging social psychology: Benefits of transdisciplinary approaches içinde (385–390). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., Hodson, G., Houlette, M. A. ve Johnson, K. M. (2005). Social inclusion and exclusion: Recategorization and the perception of intergroup boundaries. D. Abrams, M. A. Hogg ve J. M. Marques (Der.), The social psychology of inclusion and exclusion içinde (245–264). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  • Dovidio, J. F., Glick, P. ve Rudman, L. (2005). Reflecting on the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Dökmen, Z. Y. (1997). Çalışma, cinsiyet ve cinsiyet rolleri ile ev işleri ve depresyon ilişkisi. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 12(39), 39–56.
  • Eagly, A. H. ve Wood, W. (2013). The nature-nurture debates: 25 years of challenges in understanding the psychology of gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340–357. doi:10.1177/1745691613484767
  • Fiske, S. T., Lin, M. ve Neuberg, S. L. (1999). The continuum model: Ten years later. S. Chaiken ve Y. Trope (Der.), Dual-process theories in social psychology içinde (221–254). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Gieling, M., Thijs, J. ve Verkuyten, M. (2010). Tolerance of practices by Muslim actors: An integrative social-developmental perspective. Child Development, 81, 1384–1399. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 8624.2010.01480.x.
  • Helwig, C. C. (1995). Adolescents’ and young adults’ conceptions of civil liberties: Freedom of speech and religion. Child Development, 66, 152–166.
  • Hoff, E., Laursen, B., Tardif, T. ve Bornstein, M. C. (2002). Socioeconomic status and parenting. M. C. Bornstein (Der.), Handbook of parenting: Biology and ecology of parenting içinde (2315–2352). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Horn, S. S. (2003). Adolescents’ reasoning about exclusion from social groups. Developmental Psychology, 39, 71–84. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.1.71
  • Kahn, P. H. (1999). The human relationship with nature: Development and culture. MIT Press.
  • Killen, M., Kelly, M. C., Richardson, C., Crystal, D. ve Ruck, M. (2010). European American children’s and adolescents’ evaluations of interracial exclusion. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 283–300. doi:10.1177/1368430209346700
  • Killen, M., Lee-Kim, J., McGlothlin, H., Stangor, C. ve Helwig, C. C. (2002). How children and adolescents evaluate gender and racial exclusion. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 67(4), 1–129.
  • Killen, M., Pisacane, K., Lee-Kim, J. ve Ardila-Rey, A. (2001). Fairness or stereotypes? Young children’s priorities when evaluating group exclusion and inclusion. Developmental Psychology, 37, 587– 596. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.5.587
  • Killen, M. ve Rutland, A. (2011). Children and social exclusion: Morality, prejudice and group identity. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Killen, M., Sinno, S. ve Margie, N. G. (2006). Children’s experiences and judgments about group exclusion and inclusion. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 35, 173–218. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12- 009735-7.50010-4
  • Killen, M. ve Stangor, C. (2001). Children’s social reasoning about inclusion and exclusion in gender and race peer group contexts. Child Development, 72, 174–186. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00272
  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
  • Leary, M. R. (1990). Responses to social exclusion: Social anxiety, jealousy, loneliness, depression, and low self-esteem. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 221–229. doi:10.1521/ jscp.1990.9.2.221
  • Levy, G. D., Taylor, M. G. ve Gelman, S. A. (1995). Traditional and evaluative aspects of flexibility in gender roles, social conventions, moral rules, and physical laws. Child Development, 66, 515–531. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00887.x
  • Liben, L. S. ve Signorella, M. L. (1993). Gender-schematic processing in children: The role of initial interpretations of stimuli. Developmental Psychology, 29, 141–149.
  • Martin, C. L. ve Ruble, D. (2004). Children’s search for gender cues: Cognitive perspectives on gender development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 67–70. doi:10.1111/j.0963- 7214.2004.00276.x
  • Møller, S. J. ve Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Danish majority children’s reasoning about exclusion based on gender and ethnicity. Child Development, 82, 520– 532. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01568.x
  • Mulvey, K. L. ve Killen, M. (2015). Challenging gender stereotypes: Resistance and exclusion. Child Development, 86, 681–694. doi:10.1111/cdev.12317
  • Neff, K. D. ve Terry-Schmitt, L. N. (2002). Youths’ attributions for power-related gender differences: Nature, nurture, or God?. Cognitive Development, 17, 1185–1202. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(02)00094-1
  • Nesdale, D. (2000). Developmental changes in children’s ethnic preferences and social cognitions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 20, 501–519.
  • Nucci, L. P. (2001). Education in the moral domain. Cambridge University Press.
  • Nucci, L. ve Smetana, J. G. (1996). Mothers’ conceptions of young children’s areas of personal freedoms. Child Development, 67, 1870–1876.
  • Park, Y., Lee-Kim, J., Killen, M., Park, K. ve Kim, J. (2012). Korean children’s evaluation of parental restrictions regarding gender-stereotypic peer activities. Social Development, 21, 577–591. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00643.x
  • Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York, NY: International Universities Press.
  • Raabe, T. ve Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of ethnic, racial, and national prejudice in childhood and adolescence: A multinational meta-analysis of age differences. Child Development, 82, 1715–1737. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01668.x
  • Richardson, C. B., Hitti, A., Mulvey, K. L. ve Killen, M. (2014). Social exclusion: The interplay of group goals and individual characteristics. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1–14. doi:10.1007/ s10964-013-9967-8
  • Riva, P. ve Eck, J. (2016). The many faces of social exclusion. P. Riva ve J. Eck (Der.), Social exclusion: Psychological approaches to understanding and reducing its impact içinde (9–15). Springer International Publishing.
  • Rubin K. H., Bukowski W. M. ve Parker J. (2006). Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. W. Damon (Seri Der.) ve N. Eisenberg (Sayı Der.), Handbook of child psychology: Sayı 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6. baskı) içinde (571– 645). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Ruble, D. N., Martin, C. L. ve Berenbaum, S. (2006). Gender development. W. Damon ve N. Eisenberg (Der.), Handbook of child psychology: Sayı 3, Personality and social development (6. baskı) içinde (858–932). New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Rutland, A., Killen, M. ve Abrams, D. (2010). A new social-cognitive developmental perspective on prejudice: The interplay between morality and group identity. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 279–291. doi:10.1177/1745691610369468
  • Sakallı, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44, 599– 610. doi: 10.1023/A:1012295109711
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. ve Akbaş, G. (2013). Namus kültürlerinde “namus” ve “namus adına kadına şiddet”: Sosyal psikolojik açıklamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 16(32), 76–79.
  • Smetana, J. G. (1999). The role of parents in moral development: A social domain analysis. Journal of Moral Education, 28, 311–321. doi:10.1080/030572499103106
  • Smetana, J. G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations in children’s moral and social judgments. M. Killen ve J. G. Smetana (Der.), Handbook of moral development içinde (119–154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Stangor, C. ve Ruble, D. N. (1987). Development of gender role knowledge and gender constancy. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 38, 5–22.
  • Steinberg, L., Vandell, D. ve Bornstein, M. (2010). Development: Infancy through adolescence. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning. Susskind, J. E. ve Hodges, C. (2007). Decoupling children’s gender-based in-group positivity from out-group negativity. Sex Roles, 56, 707–716. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9235-z
  • Theimer, C. E., Killen, M. ve Stangor, C. (2001). Young children’s evaluations of exclusion in gender-stereotypic peer contexts. Developmental Psychology, 37, 18–27.
  • Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Turiel, E. (2006). The development of morality. D. William (Dizi Der.) ve N. Eisenberg (Cilt Der.), Handbook of child psychology: Cilt 3, Social, emotional, and personality development (6. baskı) içinde (789–857). New York: Wiley.
  • Turiel, E., Hildebrandt, C. ve Wainryb, C. (1991). Judging social issues: Difficulties, inconsistencies, and consistencies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 224, 1–116. doi:10.2307/1166056
  • Verkuyten, M. ve Slooter, L. (2007). Tolerance of Muslim beliefs and practices: Age related differences and context effects. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 467–477. doi:10.1177/0165025407081480
  • Wainryb, C., Shaw, L., Laupa, M. ve Smith, K. R. (2001). Children’s, adolescents’, and young adults’ thinking about different types of disagreements. Developmental Psychology, 37, 373–386. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.37.3.373
  • Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425–444. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085641
  • World Economic Forum,(2016). The Global Gender Gap Report 2015. Erişim tarihi: 23 Mart, 2017. Erişim adresi: http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2016/
  • Zahn-Waxler, C., Cole, P. M., Welsh, J. D. ve Fox, N. (1995). Psychophysiological correlates of empathy and prosocial behavior in preschool children with behavioral problems. Development and Psychopathology, 1, 27–48.
  • Zucker, K. J., Wilson-Smith, D. N., Kurita, J. A. ve Stern, A. (1995). Children’s appraisals of sex-typed behavior in their peers. Sex Roles, 33, 703–725. doi:0.1007/BF01544775