Abstract
Two traditional perspectives on gender development—the socialisation and cognitive perspectives— are reviewed. It is noted that although they deal quite well with individual differences within each sex with regard to degree of sex-typing, they do not offer satisfactory explanations for some of the most robust gender dimorphisms: namely, gender segregation and the divergent patterns of interaction within all-male as compared with all-female dyads or groups. These patterns are briefly summarised, and their similarity to those found in nonhuman primates and other mammals is noted. It is argued that an ethological perspective, and its modern successor the psychobiological perspective, are needed, along with the more traditional perspectives, to provide a comprehensive account of gender development as it occurs in dyads and groups as well as within individual children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
