For decades, feminist scholars have argued that to understand a person’s behavior, one must understand not only that individual but also the social structure in which she or he is embedded. Has psychology heeded these calls? The authors investigated this question using the subfield of personality as an exemplar. Based on a systematic analysis of publication trends in nine prominent journals, the authors found that social-structural analyses rarely appear in highly cited journals specifically devoted to personality research. Instead, these analyses appear in journals that focus on certain social structures (gender and race/ethnicity), while still neglecting others (social class and sexual orientation). To illustrate how greater attention to social structure can advance the scientific understanding of individuals, the authors then identified specific research programs that look closely at both personality and structure. The article concludes with specific recommendations for research and teaching in personality psychology, gender and race psychology, and beyond.
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5thed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3.
BemS. (1994). The lenses of gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University.
4.
Benet-MartinezV.JohnO. P. (1998). Los cinco grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729–750. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729
5.
BirndorfS.RyanS.AuingerP.AtenM. (2005). High self-esteem among adolescents: Longitudinal trends, sex differences, and protective factors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 37, 194–201. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.08.012
6.
BoyatzisR. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
BrownJ.GrahamD. (2008). Body satisfaction in gym-active males: An exploration of sexuality, gender, and narcissism. Sex Roles, 59, 94–106. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9416-4
8.
CitrinL. B.RobertsT.-A.FredricksonB. L (2004). Objectification theory and emotions: A feminist psychological perspective on gendered affect. In TiedensL. Z.LeachC. W. (Eds.), The social life of emotions (pp. 203–223). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
9.
ColeE. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170–180. doi:10.1037/a0014564
10.
ColeE. R.StewartA. J. (2001). Invidious comparisons: Imagining a psychology of race and gender beyond differences. Political Psychology, 22, 293–308.
11.
CooperM. L.KrullJ. L.AgochaV. B.FlanaganM. E.OrcuttH. K.GrabeS.JacksonM. (2008). Motivational pathways to alcohol use and abuse among Black and White adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 485–501. doi:10.1037/ a0012592
12.
CrawfordM.MarecekJ. (1989). Psychology reconstructs the female 1968-1988. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 147–165.
13.
DavisA.DollardJ. (1940). Children of bondage. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
14.
DeauxK.StewartA. J. (2001). Framing gendered identities. In UngerR. K. (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender (pp. 84–97). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
15.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423. doi:10.1037/ 0003-066X.54.6.408
16.
EcclesJ.JacobsJ. E. (1986). Social forces shape math attitudes and performance. Signs, 11, 367–380.
17.
EcclesJ.JacobsJ. E.HaroldR. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents' socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 183–201.
18.
EriksonE. (1951). Sex differences in the play configurations of preadolescents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 21, 667–691.
19.
EspinO. M. (1997). Latina realities: Essays on healing, migration, and sexuality. Boulder, CO: Westview.
20.
FineM. (1992). Disruptive voices: The possibilities of feminist research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
21.
FranzC. E.StewartA. J. (Eds.). (1994). Women creating lives: Identities, resilience & resistance. Boulder, CO: Westview.
22.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT.-A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x
23.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT.-A.NollS. M.QuinnD. M.TwengeJ. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284. doi:10.1037/ h0090332
24.
GalloL. C.BogartL. M.VranceanuA.MatthewsK. A. (2005). Socioeconomic status, resources, psychological experiences, and emotional responses: A test of the reserve capacity model?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 336–399.
25.
GalloL. C.MatthewsK. A. (2003). Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: Do negative emotions play a role?Psychological Bulletin, 129, 10–51. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.10
26.
GalloL. C.SmithT. W.CoxC. M. (2006). Socioeconomic status, psychosocial processes, and perceived health: An interpersonal perspective. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 31, 109–119. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm3102_2
27.
GurinP.MillerH.GurinG. (1980). Stratum identification and consciousness. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 30–47. doi:10.2307/3033746
28.
HeilmanM. E. (1995). Sex stereotypes and their effects in the workplace: What we know and what we don't know. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 10, 3–26.
29.
HelsonR.JonesC.KwanV. S. Y. (2002). Personality change over 40 years of adulthood: Hierarchical linear modeling analyses of two longitudinal samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 752–766. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.752
30.
HelsonR.StewartA. J.OstroveJ. (1995). Identity in three cohorts of women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 544–557. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.544
31.
HillM.FischerA. (2008). Examining objectification theory: Lesbian and heterosexual women's experiences with sexual- and self-objectification. Counseling Psychologist, 36, 745–776. doi:10.1177/0011000007301669
32.
HollanderE. P.YoderJ. D. (1980). Some issues in comparing women and men as leaders. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 267–280. doi:10.1207/s15324834 basp0103_6
33.
HouseJ. (1981). Social structure and personality. In RosenbergM.TurnerR. (Eds.), Social psychology: Sociological perspectives (pp. 525–561). New York, NY: Basic Books.
34.
HurtadoA. (1996). The color of privilege: Three blasphemies in race and feminism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
35.
HydeJ. S. (1990). Meta-analysis and the psychology of gender differences. Signs, 16, 55–73.
36.
InkelesA. (1959). Personality and social structure. In MertonR. K.BroomL.CottrellL. S.Jr. (Eds.), Sociology today (pp. 249–276). New York, NY: Basic Books.
37.
InkelesA. (1960). Industrial man: The relation of status to experience, perception and value. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 1–31. doi:10.1086/222819
38.
JayaratneT. E.StewartA. J. (1991). Quantitative and qualitative methods in the social sciences: Current feminist issues and practical strategies. In FonowM. M.CookJ. A. (Eds.), Beyond methodology: Feminist scholarship as lived research (pp. 85–106). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
39.
KardinerA.OveseyL. (1951). The mark of oppression: A psychosocial study of the American Negro. New York, NY: WW Norton.
40.
KingL.SmithN. (2004). Gay and straight possible selves: Goals, identity, subjective well-being, and personality development. Journal of Personality, 72, 967–994. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00287.x
41.
KozeeH.TylkaT. (2006). A test of objectification theory with lesbian women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 348–357. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00310.x
42.
Kristof-BrownA.BarrickM. R.StevensC. K. (2005). When opposites attract: A multi-sample demonstration of complementary person-team fit on extraversion. Journal of Personality, 73, 935–957. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00334.x
43.
LeeM. R. (2012). Teaching gender and intersectionality: A dilemma and social justice approach. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 110–115. doi:10.1177/0361684311426129
44.
LockenhoffC. E.TerraccianoA.BienvenuO. J.PatriciuN. S.NestadtG.McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (2008). Ethnicity, education, and the temporal stability of personality traits in the East Baltimore epidemiologic catchment area study. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 577–598. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.09.004
45.
LykesM. B.StewartA. (1986). Evaluating the feminist challenge to research in personality and social psychology: 1963-1983. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10, 393–412. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1986.tb00764.x
46.
MatthewsK. A.FloryJ. D.MuldoonM. F.ManuckS. B. (2000). Does socioeconomic status relate to central serotonergic responsivity in healthy adults?Psychosomatic Medicine, 62, 231–237.
47.
MatthewsK. A.RaikkonenK.GalloL.KullerL. H. (2008). Association between socioeconomic status and metabolic syndrome in women: Testing the reserve capacity model. Health Psychology, 27, 576–583.
48.
MertonR. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York, NY: Free Press.
49.
MorawskiJ. G. (1994). Practicing feminisms, reconstructing psychology: Notes on a liminal science. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
50.
MountM. K.BarrickM. R.ScullenS. M.RoundsJ. (2005). Higher order dimensions of the Big Five personality traits and the Big Six vocational interest types. Personnel Psychology, 58, 447–478. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00468.x
51.
NapierJ. L.JostJ. T. (2008). The “antidemocratic personality” revisited: A cross-national investigation of working-class authoritarianism. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 595–617. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00579
52.
OstroveJ. M. (2007). Intersectional analyses of identity and social justice. Sex Roles, 57, 463–465. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9259-4
53.
ParsonsT. (1964). Social structure and personality. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
54.
PaunonenS. V.JacksonD. N.TrzebinskiJ.ForsterlingF. (1992). Personality structure cultures: A multi-method evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 457–473. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.3.447
55.
PeplauL. A.ConradE. (1989). Beyond nonsexist research: The perils of feminist methods in psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 379–400. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1989.tb01009.x
56.
Purdie-VaughnsV.EibachR. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377–391. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4
57.
RiesmanD.GlazerN.DenneyR. (1950). The lonely crowd. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
58.
RigerS. (1992). Epistemological debates, feminist voices: Science, social values, and the study of women. American Psychologist, 47, 730–740. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.47.6.730
59.
RigerS. (2000). Transforming psychology: Gender in theory and practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
60.
RiosD.StewartA. J.WinterD. G. (2010). 'Thinking she could be the next president': Why identifying with the curriculum matters. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 328–338. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01578.x
61.
RobertsB. W.CaspiA.MoffittT. (2003). Work experiences and personality development in young adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 582–593. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.582
62.
RomeroM.StewartA. J. (Eds.). (1999). Women’s untold stories: Breaking silence, talking back, voicing complexity. New York, NY: Routledge.
63.
RyffC. D. (1987). The place of personality and social structure research in social psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1192–1202. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1192
64.
RyffC. D.KeyesC. L. M.HughesD. L. (2003). Status inequalities, perceived discrimination, and eudaimonic well-being: Do the challenges of minority life hone purpose and growth?Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 44, 275–291. doi:10.2307/ 1519779
65.
SharpE. A.BermudezJ.WatsonW.FitzpatrickJ. (2007). Reflections from the trenches: Our development as feminist teachers. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 529–548. doi:10.1177/0192513X06297473
66.
SherifC. W. (1987). Bias in psychology. In HerrmannA. C.StewartA. J. (Eds.), Theorizing feminisms: Parallel trends in the humanities and social sciences (pp. 117–135). Boulder, CO: Westview(Reprinted fromFeminism and methodology, pp. 37-56, by S. Harding, Ed., 1979, Bloomington, NY: Indiana University Press).
67.
SherifM.CantrilH. (1947). The psychology of ego-involvements. New York, NY: Wiley.
68.
ShieldsS. (2002). Speaking from the heart: Gender and the social meaning of emotion. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
69.
ShieldsS. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311. doi:10. 1007/s11199-008-9501-8
70.
SieverM. (1994). Sexual orientation and gender as factors in socioculturally acquired vulnerability to body dissatisfaction and eating disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 252–260. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.62.2.252
71.
SmelserN. J. (1988). Social structure. In SmelserN. J. (Ed.), The handbook of sociology (pp. 103–209). London, England: Sage.
72.
StewartA. J. (1998). Doing personality research: How can feminist theories help? In ClinchyB. M.NoremJ. K. (Eds.), Gender and psychology reader (pp. 54–68). New York: New York University Press.
73.
StewartA. J. (2003). 2002 Carolyn Sherif Award Address: Gender, race and generation in a midwest high school: Using ethnographically informed methods in psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 1–11.
74.
StewartA. J.CortinaL. M.CurtinN. (2008). Does gender matter in personality psychology?Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 2034–2048. doi:10.1111/ j.1751-9004.2008.00145.x
StewartA. J.HealyJ. M. (1989). Linking individual development and social changes. American Psychologist, 44, 30–42. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.1.30
77.
StewartA. J.McDermottC. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141537
78.
StewartA. J.OstroveJ. M. (1998). Women’s personality in middle age: Gender, history and mid-course correction. American Psychologist, 53, 1185–1194. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.11.1185
79.
Striegel-MooreR. H.TuckerN.HsuJ. (1990). Body image dissatisfaction and disordered eating in lesbians. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 9, 493–500. doi: 10.1002/1098-108X(199009)9:5<493::AID-EAT2260090504>3.0.CO;2-C
80.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In WorchelS.AustinL. W. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
81.
TwengeJ. M.CampbellW. K. (2002). Self-esteem and socioeconomic status: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 59–71.
82.
ThompsonB. (1994). A hunger so wide and so deep: American women speak out on eating problems. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
83.
UngerR. K. (1981). Sex as a social reality: Field and laboratory research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 645–653.
84.
UngerR. (Ed.). (2001). Handbook of the psychology of women and gender. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
85.
VeroffJ. (1983). Contextual determinants of personality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 331–343. doi:10.1177/0146167283093002
86.
WeissteinN. (1968). Kinder, küche, kirche as scientific law: Psychology constructs the female. Boston, MA: New England Free Press.
87.
WhiteR. W. (1966). Lives in progress. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
88.
YangK.BondM. H. (1990). Exploring implicit personality theories with indigenous or imported constructs: The Chinese case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1087–1095. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1087
89.
YoderJ. D. (2001). Making leadership work more effectively for women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 815–828. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00243
90.
YoderJ. D. (2010). Editorial: A feminist journal at the cutting edge of a psychology for women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 1–4. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01535.x
91.
YoderJ. D.KahnA. S. (2003). Making gender comparisons more meaningful: A call for more attention to social context. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 281–290. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00108
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
