CC BY
49
Нури Тайебех, аспирант, Институт психологии им. Л.С. Выготского (РГГУ), Российский государственный гуманитарный университет, г. Москва, Россия
Nouri Tayebeh
Psychology Institute named after L.S. Vygotsky, sub-department of personality psychology PHD, student of Russian State Humanitarian University, Moscow, Russia
CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF VARIOUS GENDER STEREOTYPES IN IRAN AND RUSSIA
КРОССКУЛЬТУРНОЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ РАЗЛИЧНЫХ ТЕНДЕРНЫХ СТЕРЕОТИПОВ НА ПРИМЕРЕ ИРАНА И РОССИИ
Современные подходы в кросскультурной психологии также нацелены на поиск универсалий, т.е. того, что остается универсальным в психологии человека в разных культурах. Гендерные исследования как самостоятельное научное направление сложились зарубежом сравнительно недавно, во многом они явились результатом определенного переосмысления движения и идеологии феминизма. Гендерный подход в целом предполагает, что различия в поведении и восприятии мужчин и женщин определяются не столько их физиологическими особенностями, сколько социализационными механизмами, воспитанием и распространенными в каждой культуре представлениями о сущности мужского и женского. Такое конструктивистское понимание полов расширяет возможности преодоления стереотипов.
Наиболее распространены социальные стереотипы о представителях различных расовых, национальных и религиозных групп. Предпринятые исследовательские поиски в этом направлении на материале сравнения данных, полученных в Иране и в России, дали обнадеживающие результаты. Для определения психологических различных гендерных стереотипов были применены методики Американского психолога Сандры Беем, методика Г. Триандиса для определения показателей индивидуализма и коллективизма.
В исследовании приняли участие 350 человек, из них 200 были жителями Ирана, а 150 человек проживали в России. В результате обработки данных исследования были выявлены статистически значимые различия по изучавшимся параметрам у испытуемых из Ирана и России. В то же время по ряду показателей таких различий не обнаружилось. Результаты свидетельствуют о том, что у иранских испытуемых в целом стереотипы не очень жесткие, гендерные установки в целом консервативны и устойчивы, а у русских респондентов в настоящее время не существует жестких стереотипов.
The problem of cross-cultural psychology has always been and will be relevant, actively wondering scientists from many countries.
It must be emphasized that cross-cultural (or rather, cultural) psychology has been studying the similarities and differences in the psychology of individuals belonging to different cultural and ethnic groups; links psychological differences in socio-cultural, ecological and biological characteristics, as well as the study of contemporary changes in these differences (Berry J . Et al., 1992).
Modern approaches in cross-cultural psychology are also designed to search for universals, i.e., what is universal in human psychology in different cultures. Currently, a narrow, rather exotic for cross-cultural psychology degree psychology became an established industry of hundreds of scientists from many parts of the world. In 1973, a directory of cross-cultural studies and researchers have already pointed out in 1125 scientists from 65 countries, now their number is steadily increasing. Most of them are universities in the U.S. and Europe, some universities in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Many of them are members of professional organizations such as Inetmational Organization for Cross-cultural Psychology and The Society for Cross-Cultural Research.
Gender studies as an independent scientific field developed abroad relatively recently, in the late 80-ies. In many ways they were the result of some rethinking of the movement and the ideology of feminism, the limitations of so-called women's studies, widely spread in the 60's. Problems, put forward by the feminist critique of society, required scientific testing, clarification in terms of various economic, sociological, political, cultural, psychological, linguistic approaches to the study of reality. Along with the desire for
value and ideologically neutral analysis, gender studies have experienced a great impact of the latest philosophical and methodological development that combines post-modern vision of the changes in various spheres of life. It is within the constructivist paradigm, according to which the reality of life is built according to the plurality of social and individual practices, relations predetermination or freedom in the definition of life strategies, has developed the concept of "gender" as opposed to biological sex, socio-cultural meaning grounds of sex, and, therefore, different relationships between men and women, combining male and female starts. [1]
Gender approach in general, for all the existing theoretical concepts of individual differences suggests that differences in behavior and perception of men and women are determined not only by their physiological characteristics as socialization mechanisms, education and common in every culture, ideas about the essence of male and female. Such a constructivist understanding of gender stereotypes extends the capabilities of their hierarchy, discrimination, asymmetry, and offers new versions of the interpretation of social and personal problems. Today the
attitude toward the problems of sex is largely a general indicator of man's cultural development, its inclusion in the civilized world.
A gender perspective in social psychology focuses on the study is the social (not biological) aspects of gender and role differentiation by gender, which takes place in different socio-cultural social systems. Stereotype (from Greek stereos - solid, durable and typos - the shape, pattern) - generalized, simplistic and rigid system of widely shared notions of identifiable groups of people, in which each man is regarded as a carrier of the same sets of the leading characteristics attributed to any member of the group regardless of its actual qualities. [2]
The most common social stereotypes of different racial, ethnic and religious groups. The main difference between social stereotypes of social roles that the role includes a set of requirements for a particular group of persons pursuant to which expectations are built around people, and social stereotypes suggest just waiting without a prescription.
Gender stereotypes - psychological characteristics and behaviors which are considered inherent to a greater extent the representatives of one sex (for example, men are more "aggressive" women are more "emotional"). Stereotypes contribute to the assimilation of gender roles and can serve as models of socialization for children. Masculinity/femininity is the degree to which self-perceptions
of men and women includes features that in their culture are considered as characteristic of men or women. [3]
Femininity - the characteristic forms of behavior expected of women in this society, or "socially defined expression of what is regarded as the position of those inherent in a woman." [4]
Matsumoto agrees "culture is a set of attitudes, values, beliefs and behaviors shared by a group of people and transmitted from generation to generation through language or other means of communication». [5] Do all cultures have the concept gender stereotype? Social psychologists are increasingly aware of the need for cross-cultural approach. One reason for this is that science tends to be universal and we need cross-cultural research is needed to decide whether our findings to other cultures. Another reason - the desire to avoid ethnocentrism and the assumption that if something is common in our culture, it is "normal" for humanity. The third reason is related to the value of culture: after all, and our behavior and our thoughts are subject to its influence, and cross-cultural psychology can help determine the extent to which psychological processes are changing under the influence of different cultures. Research undertaken research in this direction on the material to compare the data obtained in Iran and Russia, gave encouraging results. To determine the various psychological gender stereotypes were applied the following techniques:
METHODS
1. Methodology of the American psychologist Sandra Beem.
The essence of this methodology lies in the fact that the subjects were offered a list of psychological traits, where he was to select the most suitable for his assertions.
Most commonly, as a rule, this tool is used to measure how a grown man assesses himself in terms of gender (Naggreaves, 1987). Questionnaire includes 60 adjectives,
each of which were assessed on a 7-point scale based on how well it describes him. Twenty adjectives from this list are the scale of manhood: masculine (nd), analyzing (nd), ambitious (nd), aggressive (nd), dominant (nd), etc., constitute another twenty-scale of femininity: feminine (nd), warm (th), loving (th) of the children, attentive (th) to the needs of others, etc., and the who uses the authority within the group has a remaining twenty - Neutral: envious (nd), higher status than ordinary members includ-reliable (th) , severe (nd), self-important, ed in the group. VC emphasizes sacrificing tactful (nd). Adjectives were selected on the personality. [7] basis of what characteristics were considered
gender-appropriate in a time when the scale RESULTS AND DISCUSSION was created. This was done to determine the The study involved 350 people, of whom
place of gender in cultural context, rather 200 were residents of Iran, 150 people lived
than individual personality. [6] in Russia. In the Iranian sample was 49% and
2. G. Triandisa methodology for deter- 51% men, mean age 21.93 years, while in the
mining the indicators of individualism and Russian sample, the subjects were women
collectivism. Constructs of individualism 62% and 38% men, mean age 20.65 years.
and collectivism have become very popular The study also takes into account the level
in cross-cultural psychology, unnecessarily of education of persons surveyed. The vast
collectivist cultures emphasize the interde- majority of these were people with higher or
pendence of all individuals and certain groups incomplete higher education, both in Russia
(eg family, tribe). In individualistic cultures, and Iran.
people do not depend on their teams. One of Obtained in the study of empirical materi-
the important characteristics that distinguish als quite extensive on the studied parameters,
different kinds of individualism and collec- properties, and the volume of data received.
tivism, is the vertical and horizontal repre- General hypothesis about the stereotype of
sentation of the structure of society. Cultural Iranian male-dominated masculine quality
Horizontal stress equality, culture of the ver- was confirmed.
tical type emphasize the hierarchy. So, hori- Were found statistically significant dif-
zontal individualism (HI) emphasizes that all ferences in the studied parameters in sub-
people are equal, but each person is unique. jects from Iran and Russia. At the same time
Vertical individualism (VI) includes the ratio a number of indicators such differences are
of "isolated" and "best" in relation to other not found, suggesting the presence of com-
people. Horizontal collectivism (HC) is mon values and common units of conscious-
characterized by the absorption of "I" group, ness among people belonging to such differ-
with no assumption about the different status ent cultures.
of members of the group. Same vertical col- The results suggest that Iranian subjects
lectivism (VC) Recognizes hierarchy. Person in general are not very rigid stereotypes,
gender unit as a whole are conservative and stable, while the Russian respondents in the present there is no rigid stereotypes. All Iranian respondents acknowledged that quality as "the desire to have a definite position" the most typical for men and women.
We compare the stereotype of a Russian woman with the stereotype of Iranian women. Common characteristics for them are: "likes children", "love feasts", "polite", "jealous", "romantic", "honors the relationship." However, such qualities as "willing to comfort others", "heart", "affectionate" recognize that the Russian subjects stereotyping only for Russian women. Differences in these stereotypes is that Russian women stereotypical qualities are "compassionate", "affectionate", "shopping", "heart", "cheerful", "ready to comfort others" and "educated". And to the Iranian women: "good", "wants to have a position", "trusting", "true" and "curious".
Matches stereotypes of Russian men and an Iranian man: general qualifications for them are: "courageous", "independent", "likes to compete", "defends his beliefs", "strong", "a leader's ability". But the stereotype Russian men there are such qualities as "love of risk", "relaxed", "wants to have a certain position", "hopes only for themselves". And the stereotype of an Iranian man added, "honors the relationship", "combative", "dominant", "acts as a leader", "ambitious".
If we make a qualitative analysis of male and female stereotypes, we find that Russian women, unlike the Russian men believe that a woman "respected elder", "unpredictable", "good", "optimistic", "curious" and "true". And Russian men believe that a woman "trusting".
Russian men, unlike women believe that such quality as "respect for elders", is characteristic for both men and women. Russian women rated "loves to compete," defends his beliefs", "strong", "a leader's ability", "hopes only for himself" as a stereotype for a man of quality, but Russian men are stereotyped felt "a sense of humor", "reliability", "analytical mind".
Judging by the results obtained, the hypothesis that the stereotype of Iranian male dominated masculine quality was confirmed.
We assume that, in Iran, as in many eastern countries, has long been dominated by the patriarchal tradition in which a man is at the center of public attention. Civil law recognizes the husband as the leader of the family. On the basis of leadership demands obedience to her husband's law wife to her husband in the event of a decision in several areas of family life.
husband's leadership in the family and in making family decisions is stronger in vil-latic areas of Iran than in the capital and the urban environment. The high degree of affection, depending on the rural society from
Table 1. Descriptive characteristics of differences by the scales: individualism and collectivism (pursuant to the Method of G.Triandis) of Russian and Iranian respondents (N=200)
Scales Average indexes Significance point, Р
RUSSIA IRAN
Horizontal collectivism 64,73 61,74 0,140
Vertical collectivism 47,35 53,28 0,003
Horizontal individualism 69,95 62,21 0,017
Vertical individualism 49,70 57,30 0,000
religion and tradition, strengthens the foundations of the patriarchal system of family relations between husband, wife and children. In small towns the husband as a leader. This difference between men and women in the Russian country much less.
Analysis and comparisons of individualism and collectivism (Method F. Triandisa), using the criterion of U-Manna-Wien. (Em-prical value of the criterion U-Manna-Wien shows how two sets of values of the measured trait. The less a match, the greater the difference between these two groups) [7, pp. 216] showed that statistically significant differences were obtained for vertical collec-tivist tendencies for vertical and horizontal individualism. With regard to horizontal collectivism, in this case, no significant differences. In my opinion, if a larger number of subjects, our data would be statistically significant (see Table 1).
These data suggest that Iranian culture is characteristic of a vertical representation of the structure of society, which recognizes the hierarchy. We see that significant differences were obtained specifically for the VC, which implies that the person using the authority
within the group has a higher status than ordinary members included in the group. VC places particular emphasis on sacrificing for the sake of personal groups. All these definitions are fully consistent with the VC characteristics of Iranian society, in which the base is constant deference to elders, as evidenced by centuries-old tradition, has not lost its relevance today. And the results are confirmed, the respondents rated "respected elder", "honors the relationship" and "willing to comfort others" is very characteristic for both women and men alike quality.
And so, it is clear that the VC, where people see themselves as members of internal teams, which are characterized by hierarchical and status relationships characteristic of the Iranians. However, we see that the Iranians had also been a trend towards vertical individualism, which contradicts the hypothesis put forward by us. In my opinion, this is due to the fact that the average age of our subjects 21 years, "the age at which young people strive for self-sufficiency and independence in the judgments and authority over others, that is all that allows an individual feel comfortable in any environment
or alone, different from the other or be independent. But for the Iranians is typical of vertical individualism, which emphasizes that all human beings are autonomous, but not equal, whereas the typical Russian horizontal individualism focuses on the uniqueness of each person in their total equity.
Thus, the differences between the two cultures can also be explained by this construct, but a clear link between him and gender stereotypes, not discovered.
The data presented are selective examples illustrating the general direction of research searches. Accumulated empirical material, of course, requires more detailed analysis and presentation, but we can say that based on it is possible interpretation of this problem field and extension of impact hypotheses in perspective can shed new light on the psychological and cross-cultural study of various stereotypes. V
1.Berry J. W. , Poortinga Y.H., Segall M.N. Er Dasen P.R. Cross- Cultural psychology; Research and applications. -N. Y. , 1992.
2. Voronina, OA / / Dictionary of gender Temin. M: Informational 2002
3. Berne S. Gender psychology; M.2001
4. Richardson D. and Robinson V. Theoring Women studies, Gender studies and Masculinity. The polities of naming \\ the EJWS.1991., № 1.
5. Matsumoto, D. Psychology and Culture: Moscow, 2000
6. Mead M. Culture and the world of childhood. M., 1988. P. 78.
7. Matsumoto, D. Psychology and Culture: Moscow, 2000, pp. 23-25
8. Zherebkina I.A. Introduction to Gender Studies. Textbook, KCGS, 2001;: Aletheia, 2001. page 703
9. Krukovich E.I. Frolova J.G. A gender perspective in psychological research and konsultirvanii: Proceedings of the conference / Misc: EHU, 2002. - page 100
10. Nasledov A.D. Mathematical methods of psychological research. Data analysis and interpretation. Textbook. - St.: It.., 2004. - 392 page
11. Pines, E., Maslach C. Workshop on Social Psychology: SPB., 2000
12. Figure N. Gender stereotypes in Russian society: a view of the American ethnographer / Ethnographic obozrenie.M., 1998.S.40-50
13. Hofstede G. Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, 1980. P. 35.
14. Triandis H. C., Brislin R., Hui CM. Cross - cultural training across the individualism - collectivism divide \\ Intercultural Relations. 1988. № 12. 269- 286.
