About this paper symposium

---

Panel information
Panel 19. Sex, Gender

Paper #1
When seeking an explanation is an explanation: Children’s ability group stereotypes are influenced by explanation-seeking
Author information	Role
Jamie Amemiya, Occidental College, United States	Presenting author
Serena Spada, University of California, San Diego, United States	Non-presenting author
Molly Tallberg, University of Chicago, United States	Non-presenting author
Lin Bian, University of Chicago, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
“How a girl in the old South grew up to be a civil rights historian and a Harvard president” – Los Angeles Times (2023) As demonstrated in this news article title, people seek and provide explanations for certain groups’ achievements—underrepresented groups’ achievements tend to elicit more explanation-seeking than those of overrepresented groups. While there may be well-intentioned reasons for this explanatory focus, it may inadvertently shape observers’ ability stereotypes: Observers may infer that the explained group lacks natural ability (which is why an explanation for their success was needed), whereas the unexplained group is naturally gifted. This research tested whether observing others’ explanation-seeking can be an early contextual influence on young children’s ability stereotypes, using novel groups (Experiment 1) and gender groups in a novel science domain (Experiment 2). Children were recruited from ChildrenHelpingScience.com or a university database. Experiment 1 participants were 61 children ages 6 to 8 (31 boys, 29 girls, 1 non-binary; 30 White, 7 Asian, 7 Multiracial, 5 Latine/x, 4 Black). Experiment 2 participants were 93 children ages 5 to 8 (47 boys, 45 girls, 1 non-binary; 45 White, 17 Asian, 11 Multiracial, 2 Latine/x, 2 Black, 1 Arab). In the experiment, two groups (Experiment 1: Purples and Yellows; Experiment 2: girls and boys) succeeded in a task (Experiment 1: a school test; Experiment 2: a science competition). In the Seek Explanation condition (for Experiments 1 and 2), only one of the group’s achievements (the “explained group”) led to explanation seeking (e.g., several people said, “I have questions about how a girl won the Daxology competition”), while the other group’s achievement did not lead people to seek explanations (the “unexplained group”). In Experiment 1, the comparison condition was a neutral statement about the mentioned group (Neutral Statement condition), whereas in Experiment 2 the comparison condition sought explanations for the other group’s success in another science competition (e.g., “I have questions about how a boy won the Fepology competition”). After the manipulation, participants rated each group’s ability (e.g., “Do you think that Daxology is really easy for girls?”; “Do you think that Daxology is really easy for boys?”), and answered a forced-choice question regarding which group was naturally good at the achievement domain. Results and Discussion. Experiment 1 found that children inferred that the explained group was lower in ability than the unexplained group in the Seek Explanation condition but not in the Neutral Statement condition, B = -1.13, p = .02 (Figure 1A), and were less likely to choose the explained group as naturally good at school in the Seek Explanation condition (Figure 1B), B = -1.37, p = .02. Experiment 2 similarly found that children viewed the explained group as lower in ability than the unexplained group, B = -0.97, p < .001 (Figure 2A), and fewer children selected the explained group as naturally smart relative to when their achievements were unexplained (Figure 2B), B = -0.79, p = .04. Taken together, explanation-seeking is a pragmatic cue that children use to form group ability stereotypes.

Paper #2
The Role of Family Inequality on Children’s Normative Understanding of Household Labor
Author information	Role
Kiana Gee, University of California - Irvine, United States	Presenting author
Allegra J. Midgette, Texas A&M University, United States	Non-presenting author
Nadia Chernyak, University of California - Irvine, United States	Non-presenting author
Abstract
One of the first and most frequently experienced forms of social inequality that children encounter is within their family. Children growing up in two-parent different-sex households are often exposed to seeing their mother take on the majority of their family’s labor (OECD, 2019). This type of exposure to a gendered unequal division has developmental implications: children who grow up with a gendered division at home perpetuate such divisions within their own families as adults (Giménez-Nadal et al., 2019; Platt & Polavieja, 2016). To date, however, little is known about how these early experiences within the home affect children’s descriptive and prescriptive norms regarding household labor. In the current study, we investigate the extent to which household inequality contributes to children’s perpetuation of gendered social norms within the context of the family. We surveyed 111 4-8-year-old children (54 boys, 74 girls, mean age = 6.59) living in two parent opposite-sex families. Caregivers (both when possible) were asked to complete an exposure to inequality (EI) measure regarding their family’s division of labor (who does more of 14 commonly observed household chores). Children separately completed a perception of inequality (PI) interview, in which they were asked to answer about the same set of chores as their parents, and a Prescriptive and Descriptive Norms task, in which they were asked to distribute a 4-item and 5-item set of chores based on who “should” and who “usually” performs the given chores in a hypothetical two-parent opposite-sex family; Figure 1. Results indicate that (a) children’s perceptions were highly correlated with both of their parents’ perceptions by age 4 (p < 0.001) with mothers reported by all as doing more household work on average (all p’s < 0.001), and (b) both exposure and perception of inequality were related to children’s descriptive and prescriptive norms. Specifically, children with high levels of inequality in their own households assigned more chores to mothers in the norm task (i.e., believed women should do more chores), X2(1, N = 111) = 12.792, p < 0.001; Figure 2. Ongoing work compares this sample to single parents and same sex parents to understand how naturally occurring family structure impacts intergenerational norm transmission. Preliminary analysis of a smaller sample of children from single-parents (n = 12) indicated a trend towards rectifying inequalities during both the descriptive and prescriptive norm task (i.e. giving only about half the chores to the mom). This suggests that children in single-parent households may be experiencing a buffering effect as they are not subject to two parents complicit in inequality. This study’s findings highlight how children’s at-home observations contribute to their understanding of household norms. This may serve as a possible explanatory framework for why children often end up repeating the divisions that they see in their homes. Future research will investigate the impact of differential exposure to labor division due to differences in naturally occurring parent structures, where there is variation in the type of labor division present.

Paper #3
Gender inequities in expectations for invisible labor begin in childhood and persist into adulthood
Author information	Role
Mia Radovanovic, University of Toronto, Canada	Presenting author
Tim Wei-Ting Chao, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, United States	Non-presenting author
Nila Curtosi, University of Toronto, Canada	Non-presenting author
Sofia Westerhoff, University of Toronto, Canada	Non-presenting author
Emma Soler, University of Toronto, Canada	Non-presenting author
Jessica A. Sommerville, University of Toronto, Canada	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Women bear the brunt of invisible labor, performing more cognitive labor (e.g., anticipating others’ needs) and emotional labor (e.g., prioritizing others’ emotions) than men. These inequities are particularly insidious, as they are larger than other labor inequities (Aviv et al., 2024) but unlikely to be detected (Dean et al., 2022). Across four experiments (N=360), we establish the presence and developmental roots of gendered expectations and requests for invisible labor, as well as the devaluation of invisible labor (Figure 1). In Experiment 1 (n=72; range: 18.44 - 63.72 years) and Experiment 2 (n=96, range: 4.01 - 10.94 years), we investigated gendered expectations for emotional and cognitive labor (relative to physical labor). Participants viewed stories varying in labor type in which unknown children helped recipients (Table 1) and indicated which of two children (stereotypically masculine or feminine) they thought helped. Both adults’, x2 (2)=78.49, p<.001, and children’s selections, x2 (2)=16.96, p<.001, differed across labor types: relative to physical labor, participants disproportionately expected girls to perform emotional and cognitive labor, all ps ≤ .005. Further, in Experiment 3 (n=96; range: 19.89 - 65.37 years) and Experiment 4 (n=96, range: 4.01 - 10.94 years), we assessed whether adults and children impose invisible labor on girls. Participants saw similar stories, but indicated which child they would ask to help. Indeed, adults’, x2 (2)=135.65, p < .001, and children’s, x2 (2)=17.34, p < .001, selections differed across labor types. Relative to physical labor, adults asked girls to perform more emotional and cognitive labor, both ps<.001. Children also asked girls to perform more emotional than physical labor, z=3.60, p=.001, but their gendered requests were only marginal for cognitive labor, z=2.10, p=.09, suggesting inequity may not yet translate from children’s expectations to their requests. Relatedly, we found relations between caregivers’ and children’s gendered requests, such that children made more gendered requests when their caregivers did as well, t(95)=2.44, p=.02. Finally, these inequities could be particularly harmful because invisible labor is often devalued. Across experiments, we also showed participants stories contrasting the three types of labor and found that participants indeed devalued invisible labor. Adults reported emotional labor was less helpful than physical and cognitive labor, both ps<.001, and that cognitive labor was less helpful than physical, x2 (1)=5.72, p < .02. Although children also devalued emotional labor, both ps<.001, children’s judgements were split across physical and cognitive labor, p=.55. Together, we find that multifaceted, psychological factors reinforce gender inequities in invisible labor: adults expect and request girls to perform invisible labor, while also devaluing this labor. However, despite early-emerging gendered expectations for invisible labor, children seem to reason more flexibly about cognitive labor than adults, expecting cognitive labor from girls, but not yet consistently requesting or devaluing it. As such, important developmental changes appear to occur in children’s reasoning about gender and cognitive labor.

Paper #4
The Role of Gender Stereotypes in Shaping Communality in Children
Author information	Role
Cameron Hall, University of British Columbia, Canada	Presenting author
Katharina Block, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands	Non-presenting author
Antonya M. Gonzalez, Western Washington University, United States	Non-presenting author
Andrei Cimpian, New York University, United States	Non-presenting author
Toni Schmader, University of British Columbia, Canada	Non-presenting author
Andrew Scott Baron, University of British Columbia, Canada	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Communal values, which emphasize empathy, cooperation, and nurturing behaviors, are essential for fostering social cohesion and building interpersonal relationships (Abele & Wojciszke, 2014; Bakan, 1966; Baumeister & Leary, 1995). However, these values are often gendered, with societal norms and stereotypes more strongly associating them with women than with men (Eagly et al., 2019). Underscoring the need to document their origins and development, these associations can have lasting effects on the gendered division of emotional labor, childcare responsibilities, and career choices (Croft et al., 2015; Meeussen et al., 2020). Three studies investigate the developmental origins and consequences of gender stereotypes about communal values in children ages 4-11. In Study 1 children (N=168 4-to-8 year-olds) reported who they believed valued communality more (e.g., “It is very important to be caring and kind to others”) between a girl and boy avatar. Children also reported their own gender stereotypes about communal traits (e.g., "Who do you think cares more about always helping other people, even if it takes effort? Boys or girls?”; items adapted from Block et al., 2018a). Results showed that by age six, children already hold strong gender stereotypes about communal values, associating traits such as kindness, empathy, and helpfulness more with girls than with boys, b = −1.05, SE = 0.24, t(164) = −4.40, p < .001, 95% CI = [−1.52, −0.58]. Next, Study 2 explored how these stereotypes affect boys' (N=211, 4-11-year-olds) development of communal values and interest in communal activities. Evidence shows that boys who endorsed gender stereotypes about communality were less likely to personally value communal traits, β = −0.25, SE = 0.10, t(104) = −2.60, p = .011, 95% CI = [−0.44, −0.06], and showed decreased interest in communal activities, β = −0.24, SE = 0.10, t(104) = −2.53, p = .013, 95% CI = [−0.43, −0.05]. These findings suggest that early exposure to gendered expectations may play a significant role in boys’ disengagement from communal domains, reinforcing gender imbalances in adulthood. Finally, Study 3, investigates how gendered communal stereotypes shape girls' behaviors. Whereas prior research has documented that teachers and parents tend to expect higher prosocial behavior from girls (Bouchard et al., 2015; Soto, 2016), this study sought to delve into the more pernicious underbelly of gendered expectations of prosociality—namely, the socialization of submissiveness. We explore whether societal pressure to prioritize communal values encourages girls to consistently put others' needs before their own, even to their detriment. Data collection is ongoing and our hypothesis is that girls are more likely than boys to prioritize others' well-being over their own and that this tendency will be positively associated with their internalization of gendered communal stereotypes. Taken together, this research highlights how early gender stereotypes about communal values not only shape children’s immediate behavior and interests but also contribute to the formation of gender roles and the unequal division of emotional labor in adulthood.

⇦ Back to session