This article examines the sex role identity of college students in India and in Australia and empirically tests the validity of the prediction that androgyny is the product of educated, middle-class, Western societies. Results reveal that sex role transcendence, rather than androgyny, is the product of Western societies such as Australia. Androgyny, on the other hand, was found to be more predominant in certain traditional cultures, such as India, and was particularly predominant among Indian males. These findings have important implications not only for sex role theory but also for cross-cultural investigations of sex role identity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bannister, D. , & Mair, J. M. M. (1968). The evaluation of personal construct. London: Academic Press.
2.
Bell, R. (1975). Significant roles among a sample of Australian women. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 11, 2-11.
3.
Dasgupta, S. (1977). Hindu ethos and the challenge of change. New Delhi: Arnold-Heineman.
4.
Dube, S. C. (1963). Men's and women's roles in India: A sociological review. In B. E. Ward (Ed.), Women in the new Asia. Paris: UNESCO.
5.
Farnill, D. , & Ball, I. L. (1982). Some further psychometric data on the Australian sex-role scale. Australian Psychologist, 17(3), 349.
6.
Hate, C. A. (1969). Changing status of women in post independence India. New York: Paragon Book Reprint.
7.
Hefner, R. , Rebecca, M., & Oleshansky, B. (1975). Development of sex role transcendence. Human Development, 18, 143-158.
8.
Hogan, H. W. (1979). German and American responses to the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Journal of Social Psychology, 109, 141-142.
9.
Holter, H. (1970). Sex roles and social structure. Oslo, Norway: Westholms Boktrkkiri.
10.
Johnson, M. (1977). Androgyny and the maternal principle. School Review, 86, 50-69.
11.
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (Vols. I & 2). New York: W. W. Norton.
12.
Kennedy, B. C. (1973). On being a woman-Indian and American: A comparative study. Asian Survey, 13, 833-852.
13.
Kenworthy, J. A. (1979). Androgyny in psychotherapy. But will it sell in Peoria?Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3(3), 231-240.
14.
Lipman-Blumen, J. , & Tickmayer, A. R. (1975). Sex roles in transition: A ten-year perspective. In A. Inkeles (Ed.), Annual Review of Sociology, 1, 297-337.
15.
Maloney, P. , Wilkof, J., & Dambrot, F. (1981). Androgyny across two cultures: United States and Israel. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 12, 95-102.
16.
Marecek, J. (1977). Psychological androgyny and positive mental health: A biosocial perspective. In C. G. Carney & S. L. McMahon (Eds.), Exploring contemporary male/female roles. Palo Alto, CA: University Associates.
17.
Marecek, J. (1979). Social change, positive mental health and psychological androgyny. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3(3), 241-247.
18.
Mines, M. (1981). Indian transitions: A comparative analysis of adult stages of development. Ethos, 9(2), 95-121.
19.
Nicholson, S. I. , & Antill, J. K. (1981). Personal problems of adolescents and their relationship to peer acceptance and sex role identity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 1O(4), 309-325.
20.
Patel, A. S. (1975). An approach to behavior as expounded in the Indian Scriptures. In J. N. Berry & W. Lonner (Eds.), Applied cross-cultural psychology. London: Methuen.
21.
Puig-Casauranc, M. (1977). Personality and interest characteristics of females in traditional and non-traditional fields of academic study and their relationship to psychological androgyny. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37A, 5001. (University Microfilms No. 77-2895).
22.
Ravinder, S. (1984). Sex role identity: An alternate paradigm. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
23.
Ravinder, S. (1986a). The relevance of the RCRT for the measurement of sex role identity. Paper presented at the Third Australasian Personal Construct Conference, Lincoln Institute of Health Sciences, Melbourne, Australia.
24.
Ravinder, S. (1987). An empirical investigation of Garnet's and Pleck's sex role strain analysis. Sex Roles, 16, 165-179.
25.
Rebecca, M. , Hefner, R., & Oleshansky, B. (1976). A model of sex-role transcendence. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 197-206.
26.
Sampson, S. (1979). Sex stereotypes: Some evidence from Australian schools. .+, [0-9][0-9]([0-9]), 132-141.
27.
Singh, P. N. , Huang, S. C., & Thompson, G. G. (1962). A comparative study of selected attitudes, values and personality characteristics of American, Chinese and Indian students. Journal of Social Psychology, 57, 123-132.
28.
Spence, J. T. , & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.
29.
Stark-Adamec, D. , Graham, J. M., & Pyke, S. W. (1980). Androgyny and mental health: the need for a critical evaluation of the theoretical equation. International Journal of Women's Studies, 3(5), 490-507.
30.
Tyer, Z. E. , & Erdwins, C. J. (1979). Relationship of sex role to male-and female-dominated professions. Psychological Reports, 44, 1134.
31.
Ward, C. (1979). Explorations in sex role stereotypes. Dissertation Abstracts International, 39B, 3598. (University Microfilms No. 7900857)
32.
Williams, J. E. , & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
