This document discusses examples of potential bias and pseudoscience in psychology related to gender. It provides historical examples from the 1960s and 1950s of prominent psychologists making claims based on prevailing social attitudes rather than scientific evidence, such as suggesting women's primary role is as companions to men. It also discusses potential biases that can occur in psychological research related to accentuating gender differences, using men as the default baseline, and over-interpreting results from male-only samples. Finally, it notes debates around whether gender differences are based on biology or influenced by social situations.

1. PS409
Psychology, Science,
& Pseudoscience
Dr Brian Hughes
School of Psychology
brian.hughes@nuigalway.ie @b_m_hughes

2. Case Studies:
Examples of Psychology-related
Pseudoscience

3. Case Studies from
Within Mainstream Psychology:
1. Biological reductionism and gender

4. Masculinist bias in psychology
Use of prevailing social attitudes as scientific
assumptions
Bruno Bettelheim
(1965)
“We must start with the
realization that, as much as
women want to be good
scientists or engineers, they
want first and foremost to
be womanly companions of
men, and to be mothers.”

5. Masculinist bias in psychology
Use of prevailing social attitudes as scientific
assumptions
“the infant and young
child should experience a
warm, intimate, and
continuous relationship
with his mother (or
permanent mother
substitute)…”
John Bowlby
(1951)

6. Masculinist bias in psychology
Use of prevailing social attitudes as scientific
assumptions
“…this complex rich and
rewarding relationship with
the mother in the early years,
varied in countless ways by
relations with the father and
with siblings …underlie[s] the
development of character and
mental health”
John Bowlby
(1951)

7. Masculinist bias in psychology
Accentuation of sex differences
Tendency to
notice sex
differences and
to under-
emphasize ‘sex
similarities’
File-drawer
problem

8. Masculinist bias in psychology
Arbitrary use of men as the ‘baseline’
(c.f., Tavris, 1993)
Traditional formulation Alternative formulation
Women have lower self-esteem than Men are more conceited than
men women
Women do not value their efforts as Men overvalue the work they do
much as men
Women are less self-confident than Men are not as realistic as women in
men assessing their abilities
Women are more likely to say Men are more likely to accuse or
they’re hurt than admit they’re attack others when unhappy,
angry instead of stating that they feel hurt
or looking for sympathy
Women have more difficulty Men have more difficulty in forming
developing a ‘separate sense of self’ and maintaining relationships

9. Areas of potential bias in
research
Stage 1: Question formulation
“Male standard”/Men as baseline
Stage 2: Research methods
Sample selection biased to question
Over-use of male samples
Over-interpretation of male samples
Stage 3: Data analysis and reporting
Under-reporting of ‘sex similarities’
Stage 4: Interpretation
Extrapolation of ‘male’ findings to females
Group vs. individual differences
Person-situation controversy

10. Group vs. Individual Differences

11. Group vs. Individual Differences

12. Group vs. Individual Differences

13. Person-situation controversy
Are gender differences biological or situation-based?
“Parenting instincts” and gender (Risman, 1987)
Single fathers more similar to single mothers than to
married parents
Activity/passivity of boys/girls (Maccoby, 1990)
In play studies, gender of co-players, not of subject,
determines activity/passivity

14. PS409
Psychology, Science,
& Pseudoscience
Dr Brian Hughes
School of Psychology
brian.hughes@nuigalway.ie @b_m_hughes