Gender Ideology
Gender Ideology
Gender Ideology
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800070?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual
Review of Sociology
*7
88 Davis ? Greenstein
go Davis ? Greenstein
aInstrument abbreviations: GSS, General Social Survey; HS&B, High School and Beyond; IPSPC, Intergenerational Panel Study of Parents and
Children; ISSP, International Social Survey Program; MIOLC, Marital Instability over the Live Course; NLSY79&C-YA, National Longitudinal Survey
of Youth, 1979 Cohort and Child/Young Adult Sample; NSCW, National Study of the Changing Workforce; NSFH, National Study of Families and
Households; WVS, World Values Survey.
2 Davis ? Greenstein
94 Davis ? Greenstein
6 Davis ? Greenstein
g 8 Davis ? Greenstein
SUMMARY POINTS
1. Gender ideology has been measured using many different individual items that can be
organized into six categories: primacy of the breadwinner role, belief in gendered separate
spheres, working women and relationship quality, motherhood and the feminine self,
household utility, and acceptance of male privilege.
2. Although social and demographic characteristics based on vested interests and exposures
to egalitarianism continue to contribute to the extent to which an individual holds an
egalitarian gender ideology, the influence of those characteristics seems to be waning,
owing largely to cohort replacement. However, women continue to be more likely to
hold egalitarian gender ideologies than men.
3. Gender ideology acts as a lens through which individuals view their social world and
upon which they make decisions. Many family-related behaviors, such as fertility tim
ing, relationship timing, quality, dissolution, and childrearing are influenced by gender
ideology. In addition, gender ideology influences the decisions adolescents and young
adults make regarding education and employment as well as the returns on investments
young adults make in their human capital.
FUTURE ISSUES
1. Does the type of measure used to capture gender ideology provide different responses
at different points in the life course? How is the reliability of measures influenced by
individual-level change in respondents? Are certain measures better at different points
in the life course than others?
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The authors are not aware of any biases that might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this
review.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Laura Hinton for her assistance with the completion of this review. We also thank our
research collaborators, especially Jeremiah B. Wills and Matthew Loyd, for conversations that led
to improvements in this review.
LITERATURE CITED
Aldous J, Mulligan GM, Bjarnason T. 1998. Fathering over time: What makes the difference? J. Marriage
Fam. 60:809-20
Amato PR, Booth A. 1995. Changes in gender role attitudes and perceived marital quality. Am. Sociol. Rev.
60:58-66
Appelbaum M, BelskyJ, Booth C, Bradley R, Brownell C, et al. 2000. Factors associated with fathers' caregiving
activities and sensitivity with young children. J. Fam. Psychol. 14:200-19
Atkinson MP, Greenstein TN, Lang MM. 2005. For women, breadwinning can be dangerous: gendered
resource theory and wife abuse. J. Marriage Fam. 67:1137-48
Baber KM, Tucker CJ. 2006. The social roles questionnaire: a new approach to measuring attitudes toward
gender. Sex Roles 54:459-67
Baker EH, Sanchez LA, Nock SL, Wright JD. 2009. Covenant marriage and the sanctification of gendered
marital roles. J. Fam. Issues 30:147-78
Banaszak LA, Plutzer E. 1993. Contextual determinants of feminist attitudes?national and subnational in
fluences in western-Europe. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 87:147-57
Barnett R, Rivers C. 2004. Same Difference: How Gender Myths are Hurting Our Relationships, Our Children, and
Our Jobs. New York: Basic Books
Bartkowski JP. 2001. Remaking the Godly Marriage: Gender Negotiation in Evangelical Families. New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press
Batalova JA, Cohen PN. 2002. Premarital cohabitation and housework: couples in cross-national perspective.
J. Marriage Fam. 64:743-55
Baxter J. 1992. Power attitudes and time: the domestic division of labour. J. Comp. Fam. Stud. 23:165-82
Bianchi SM, Milkie MA, Sayer LC, Robinson JP. 2000. Is anyone doing the housework: trends in the gender
division of household labor. Soc. Forces 79:191-228
Bianchi SM, Robinson JP, Milkie MA. 2006. Changing Rhythms of American Family Life. New York: Russell
Sage Found.
Blair SL. 1993. Employment, family, and perceptions of marital quality among husbands and wives. J. Fam.
Issues 14:189-212
Bliss SB. 1988. The effect of feminist attitudes in parents on their kindergarten-children. Smith Coll. Stud. Soc.
Hfcr* 58:182-92
Bolzendahl CI, Myers DJ. 2004. Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: opinion change in women
and men, 1974-1998. Soc. Forces 83:759-89
BondJT, Galinsky E, SwanbergJE. 1998. The 1991National Study of the Changing Workforce. New York: Work
Fam. Inst.
Davis ? Greenstein
o4 Davis ? Greenstein