Pasterski, Vickie, Zwierzynska, Karolina and Estes, Zachary, 1973-. (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)

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.

[error in script] [error in script]

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
Date:	December 2011
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.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/39053

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item