measure in this research, the Bem Sex Role Inventory, asks people the extent
to which 20 masculine and 20 feminine terms describe them. Unfortunately,the masculine terms in the scale tend to be more desirable than the feminine
terms (Pedhazur & Tetenbaum, 1979). It makes sense that people who describe
themselves with the more flattering and positive masculine terms (for example,
self-reliant, ambitious) have higher self-esteem than those who describe them-
selves with feminine terms (for example, gullible, shy). Third, it seems quite
possible that some aspects of a healthy personality, such as dealing with stressand personal achievement, are related to masculinity, whereas other aspects,
such as developing good interpersonal relationships, are not (Marsh & Byrne,
1991). Individual differences in gender-role behavior are clearly tied to well-being in some way. However, just how these two are related remains the fuel
for continued research.
Gender Type and Interpersonal Relationships
Who would you turn to if you needed to talk to someone about a personal
problem —a masculine, feminine, androgynous, or undifferentiated person?
Who would you prefer for a friend? For a romantic partner? Advertisements
and TV shows often portray masculine men and feminine women as the
most desirable partners for romantic encounters. And Americans spend a con-
siderable amount of money on makeup, body-building equipment, and the
like to make themselves appear more feminine or masculine. But is this the
road to a perfect relationship? Some research suggests it may not be.
A simple way to examine how people react to different gender types is to
ask participants about hypothetical character sketches of masculine, feminine,androgynous, and undifferentiated individuals. In general, researchers usingthis procedure find the androgynous character is liked more than the other
three (Brooks-Gunn & Fisch, 1980; Gilbert, Deutsch, & Strahan, 1978;
Jackson, 1983; Korabik, 1982; Kulick & Harackiewicz, 1979; Slavkin &Stright, 2000). Undergraduates in one study said the androgynous person was
more popular, more interesting, better adjusted, more competent, more intelli-
gent, and more successful than people described in masculine, feminine, orundifferentiated terms (Major, Carnevale, & Deaux, 1981). And when research-
ers asked college students to estimate the desirability of hypothetical romantic
partners, both men and women showed a preference for the androgynous person
(Green & Kenrick, 1994).
But do these impressions of hypothetical people translate into actual be-
haviors? To answer this question, one team of researchers created four typesof male-female pairs: a masculine man and a feminine woman, an androgy-
nous woman and a masculine man, a feminine woman and an androgynous
man, and two androgynous people (Ickes & Barnes, 1978). The couples,
who did not know each other before the study, were left alone in a room for
5 minutes. The participants were free to carry on a conversation or simply sit
quietly and wait. Their behavior was recorded with a hidden video camerafor later evaluation. Participants also were asked to rate afterward how
much they had enjoyed the interaction. As shown in Figure 14.3, members of
the masculine man –feminine woman dyads enjoyed their interactions the382 CHAPTER 14 The Behavioral/Social Learning Approach