Whether the result of biology, the result of culture, or the interaction of both, modern research on gender concurs: men and women are different. This deceptively simple finding raises a series of interesting questions for work in the integration of psychology and theology. Do women think of integration differently than men? Does the impact of being a mother affect how women imagine integration? And is traditional integrative literature congenial with women's perceptions? If not, why aren't there more women writing on integration in ways that highlight their unique contributions? How are we to account for women's apparent silence when it comes to integration? The present study investigated these questions via exploratory qualitative research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AriesE. (1982). Verbal and nonverbal behavior in single-sex and mixed-sex groups: Are traditional sex roles changing?Psychological Reports, 51, 127–134.
2.
BalkanD. (1966). The duality of human existence.Chicago: Rand-McNally.
3.
BelenkyM., ClinchyB., GoldbergerN., & TaruleJ. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self voice and mind.New York: Basic Books.
4.
Bouma-PredigerS. (1990). The task of integration: A modest proposal. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 18, 21–31.
5.
BrovermanI., VogelS., BrovermanD., ClarksonF., & SenkrantzP. (1970). Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 1–7.
6.
BufferyA., & GrayJ. (1972). Sex differences in the development of spatial and linguistic skills. In OuntedC., & TaylorD. (Eds.), Gender differences (pp. 123–157). Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone.
7.
CarterJ. D. (1977). Secular and sacred models of psychology and religion. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 5, 197–208.
8.
ChodorowN. (1978). The reproduction of mothering.Berkeley, CA: University Press.
9.
ChodorowN. (1991). Where have all the eminent women psychoanalysts gone. In BlauJ., & GoodmanN. (Eds.), Social roles and social institutions (pp. 167–194). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
10.
CollinsG. R. (1981). Psychology and theology: Prospects for integration.Nashville, TN: Abingdon.
11.
CollinsG. R. (1983). Moving through the jungle: A decade of integration. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 11, 2–7.
FarmerS. (1988). Softening the hearts of men: Women embodiment and persuasion in the 13th century. In CooeyP. M., FarmerS. A., & RossM. E. (Eds.), Embodied love: Sensuality and relationship as feminist values (pp. 115–133). San Francisco: Harper & Row.
14.
FarnsworthK. E. (1982). The conduct of integration. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 10, 308–319.
15.
FeatherN., & FeatherL. (1984). Masculinity, femininity, psychological androgyny, and the structure of values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 604–620.
16.
GilliganC. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
GoldmanL. (1993). Reaction: A broader scientific base for professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 250–251.
18.
HarlowH. (1971). Learning to love.San Francisco: Album.
19.
HenningM., & JardimA. (1976). The managerial woman.New York: Simon & Schuster.
20.
HoffmanM. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 712–722.
21.
HornerM. S. (1972). Toward an understanding of achievement-related conflicts in women. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 157–175.
22.
HowardG. S. (1984). On studying humans. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 101–109.
23.
HowardG. S. (1993). I think I can! I think I can! Reconsidering the place for practice methodologies in psychological research. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 237–244.
24.
Journal of Psychology, and Theology. (1993). 20-year index.
25.
KanterR. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation.New York: Basic Books.
26.
KirkJ., & MillerM. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in quantitative research.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
27.
KohutH. (1984). How does analysis cure?Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
KohutJ. (1991, August). Changes in supply: Women in psychology. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA.
29.
KvaleS. (1987). Interpretation of the qualitative research interview. In van ZuurenF. J., WertzF. J., & MookB. (Eds.), Advances in qualitative psychology: Themes and variations (pp. 25–30). Berwyn: Swets North American.
30.
LeeD. J. (1993). Storying ourselves: A narrative perspective on Christians in psychology.Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.
31.
Leet-PellegriniH. M. (1980). Conversational dominance as a function of gender and expertise. In GilesH., RobinsonW. P., & SmithP. (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 97–104). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
32.
LevyJ. (1969). Possible bases for the evolution of lateral specialization in the human brain. Nature, 224(219), 614–615.
33.
MaccobyE., & JacklinC. (1974). The psychology of sex differences.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
34.
MalonyN. H. (1978). Psychology and faith.Washington, DC: University Press of America.
35.
MalonyN. H. (1986). Integrative musings: Thoughts on being a Christian professional.Pasadena, CA: Integration Press.
36.
MillerJ. B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women.Boston: Beacon Press.
37.
MillerJ. B. (1991). Women and power. In Women's growth in connection.New York: Guilford Press.
38.
MoneyJ., & EhrhardtA. (1972). Man and woman, boy and girl.Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins.
39.
NiveaV., & GutekB. (1981). Women and work: A psychological perspective.New York: Preager.
40.
OchsC. (1983). Women and spirituality.Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld.
41.
OstertagP., & McNamaraJ. (1991). “Feminization” of psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 349–369.
42.
PattonM. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
43.
PhilipsonI. J. (1993). On the shoulders of women: The feminization of psychotherapy.New York: Guilford Press.
44.
PolkinghorneD. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences.New York: State University of New York Press.
45.
ProchaskaJ. O. (1993). I think we can. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, 250–251.
46.
RandourM. L. (1987). Women's psyche, women's spirits: The reality of relationships.New York: Columbia University Press.
47.
SewardJ., & SewardG. (1980). Sex differences: Mental and temperamental.Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.
48.
SorensonR. L. (1996a). The tenth leper. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 24, 197–211.
49.
SorensonR. L. (1996b). “Where are the nine?”Journal of Psychology and Theology, 24, 179–196.
50.
TannenD. (1990). You just don't understand.New York: Ballantine Books.
51.
Van LeeuwenM. S. (1982). A Christian look at the changing face of psychology.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
52.
Van LeeuwenM. S. (1985). The person in psychology: A contemporary Christian appraisal.Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press.
53.
Van LeeuwenM. S. (1988). Christian maturity in light of feminist theory. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 16, 168–182.
54.
Van LeeuwenM. S. (1990). Gender and grace: Love, work, and parenting in a changing world.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
55.
Vande KempH. (1982a). The tension between psychology and theology: The anthropological solution. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 10, 205–211.
56.
Vande KempH. (1982b). The tension between psychology and theology: The etymological roots. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 10, 105–112.
57.
Vande KempH., & HousekampB. (1986). An early attempt of integration: The “Journal of Psychotherapy as a Religious Process.”Journal of Psychology and Theology, 14, 3–14.
58.
WeissR. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies.New York: Macmillan.
59.
WertzF. J., & van ZuurenF. J. (1987). Qualitative research: Educational considerations. In van ZuurenF. J., WertzF. J., & MookB. (Eds.), Advances in qualitative psychology: Themes and variations (pp. 3–23). Berwyn: Swets North America.
60.
WhitingB., & WhitingJ. (1975). Children of six cultures: A psychocultural analysis.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
