Following from this, early prenatal effects of sex hormones have been suggested to impact sex-typed preferences in children (for a review, see Berenbaum & Beltz, 2016). However, sex-typed play behavior appears long before puberty in a time frame in which there are no differences in sex hormone levels between boys and girls (Hines, 2010). Sex hormones that are involved in the development of primary and secondary sexual characteristics in ontogenesis are a likely candidate for such a biological component. Both the early appearance of sex-specific play preferences in children, as well as the evidence from non-human primates, suggest a biological component in the emergence of sex-typed play preferences in addition to socialization influences. This is notable because non-human primates are obviously less subject to social influences. Noticeably, not only children, but also non-human primates seem to prefer to play with sex-specific toys (Alexander & Hines, 2002 Hassett, Siebert, & Wallen, 2008). Observational studies typically find sex differences for playing with cars/trucks and dolls (for reviews, see Davis & Hines, 2020 Zosuls & Ruble, 2018) that are smaller than for parents’ reports on sex-typed play preferences in a questionnaire (for a review, see Hines, 2010). However, the size of these sex differences depends on the method used to determine sex-typed play preference. Whereas such sex differences in toy preference are only modest in size around one year of age (for a review, see Zosuls & Ruble, 2018), they increase with age (Golombok et al., 2008 for a review, see Todd et al., 2018) with very large effect sizes of about Cohen’s d = 3 for preschool and primary school children (for a review and meta-analysis, see Davis & Hines, 2020 Hines, 2010). Sex-typed toy preference is one of the earliest observed sex differences in behavior, becoming apparent in children as young as 12 months (Servin, Bohlin, & Berlin, 1999 Todd, Barry, & Thommessen, 2017 Todd et al., 2018 van de Beek, van Goozen, Buitelaar, & Cohen-Kettenis, 2009). These data underline the stability of the sex difference in 2D:4D and show the importance of both biological and social influences on sex-typed play behavior. Girls, but not boys, who were described as playing more masculine and less feminine had more masculine 2D:4D ratios at T1–T4 on both hands (except for right 2D:4D at T2 and T3) and had more older brothers and fewer older sisters. Nevertheless, 2D:4D increased significantly from T3 to T4 in both sexes. Boys had smaller 2D:4D than girls at all measurements (T1–T4) and on both hands (right/left). Parents described boys as playing more masculine and less feminine than girls. Parents completed the Preschool Activities Inventory at T4 and reported on the number of older brothers and sisters as a measure for socialization influences. In the present study, children’s 2D:4D was measured on both hands on four occasions from early infancy to early childhood (T1: 5 months, T2: 9 months, T3: 20 months, and T4: 40 months) providing the rare possibility to test the temporal stability of the sex difference. Nevertheless, it is still being debated whether 2D:4D displays a stable sex difference throughout childhood, as there are few longitudinal studies. For example, a smaller, more male-typical ratio between the second and fourth digit length (2D:4D), a proposed marker for prenatal testosterone exposure, has been shown to be related to sex-typed play preference in childhood. Sex-typed play behavior shows large sex differences and seems to be affected by prenatal sex hormones.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |