The Library

Sex differences in semantic categorization

Tools

Pasterski, Vickie, Zwierzynska, Karolina and Estes, Zachary. (2011) Sex differences in semantic categorization. Archives of Sexual Behavior , Vol.40 (No.6). pp. 1183-1187. ISSN 0004-0002

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Estes_0484043-ps-161111-pasterski_et_al_preprint.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (172Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9764-y

Abstract

Sex differences in certain cognitive abilities, including aspects of semantic processing, are well established. However, there have been no reports investigating a sex difference in semantic categorization. A total of 55 men and 58 women each judged 25 exemplars of natural categories (e.g., fruits) and 25 of artifact categories (e.g., tools) as a nonmember, partial member, or full member of the given category. Participants also rated confidence for each judgment. Women provided a greater number of vague (partial member) judgments whereas men provided more inclusive (full member) judgments of artifacts but more exclusive (nonmember) judgments of natural categories. The sex difference in vagueness was observed across domains (Cohen’s d = .56). Confidence predicted categorization among both men and women, such that more confident participants exhibited fewer vague category judgments. However, men and women were equally confident in their category judgments, and confidence failed to explain the sex difference in categorization. Men and women appear to categorize the same common objects in systematically different ways.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology

Divisions:

Faculty of Science > Psychology

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Cognition -- Sex differences

Journal or Publication Title:

Archives of Sexual Behavior

Publisher:

Springer

ISSN:

0004-0002

Official Date:

December 2011

Dates:

Date	Event
December 2011	Published

Volume:

Vol.40

Number:

No.6

Page Range:

pp. 1183-1187

Identification Number:

10.1007/s10508-011-9764-y

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Publication Status:

Published

Access rights to Published version:

Restricted or Subscription Access

Funder:

University of Warwick

References:

Barbarotto, R., Laiacona, M., Macchi, V., & Capitani, E. (2002). Picture reality decision, semantic categories and gender: A new set of pictures, with norms and an experimental study. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1637-1653.
Bermeitinger, C., Wentura, D., & Frings, C. (2008). Nature and facts about natural and artifactual categories: Sex differences in the semantic priming paradigm. Brain & Language, 106, 153-163.
Capitani, E., Laiacona, M., & Barbarotto, R. (1999). Gender affects word retrieval of certain categories in semantic fluency tasks. Cortex, 35, 273-278.
Carli, L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941-951.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Diesendruck, G., & Gelman, S. A. (1999). Domain differences in absolute judgments of category membership: Evidence for an essentialist account of categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 338-346.
Estes, Z. (2003). Domain differences in the structure of artifactual and natural categories. Memory & Cognition, 31, 199-214.
Estes, Z. (2004). Confidence and gradedness in semantic categorization: Definitely somewhat artifactual, maybe absolutely natural. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1041-1047.
Golombok, S., & Rust, J. (1993). The Pre-school Activities Inventory: A standardized assessment of gender role in children. Psychological Assessment, 5, 131-136.
Hampton, J. A. (1998). Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories. Cognition, 65, 137-165.
Hampton, J. A. (2007). Typicality, graded membership, and vagueness. Cognitive Science, 31, 355-384.
Hampton, J. A., Storms, G., Simmons, C. L., & Heussen, D. (2009). Feature integration in natural language concepts. Memory & Cognition, 37, 1150-1163.
Hines, M. (2009). Sex and sex differences. In P. D. Zelazo (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581-592.
Hyde, J. S. (2007). New directions in the study of gender similarities and differences. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 16, 259-263.
Kimura, D. (2002). Sex hormones influence human cognitive pattern. Neuroendocrinology Letters Special Issue, (Suppl.4) 23, 67-77.
Kolb, B., & Wishaw, I. Q. (1985). Fundamentals of human neuropsychology (2nd ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman and Co.
Laws, K. R. (1999). Gender affects naming latencies for living and nonliving things: Implications for familiarity. Cortex, 35, 729-733.
Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479-1498.
Palomares, N. A. (2009). Women are sort of more tentative than men, aren’t they? How men and women use tentative language differently, similarly, and counterstereotypically as a function of gender salience. Communication Research, 36, 538-560.
Rhodes, M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Five-year-olds’ beliefs about the discreteness of category boundaries for animals and artifacts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 920-924.
Spreen, O., & Strauss, E. (1991). A compendium of neuropsychological tests. New York: Oxford University Press.
Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250-270.