presentation variable means boy or girl

Getting pregnant
Preschooler
Life as a parent
Baby essentials
Find your birth club
Free antenatal classes
Meet local parents & parents-to-be
See all in Community
Ovulation calculator
Am I pregnant quiz
How to get pregnant fast
Best sex positions
Signs of pregnancy
How many days after your period can you get pregnant?
How age affects fertility
Very early signs of pregnancy
What fertile cervical mucus looks like
Think you're pregnant but the test is negative?
Faint line on pregnancy test
See all in Getting pregnant
Pregnancy week by week
How big is my baby?
Due date calculator
Baby movements week by week
Symptoms you should never ignore
Hospital bag checklist
Signs of labour
Your baby's position in the womb
Baby gender predictor
Vaginal spotting
Fetal development chart
See all in Pregnancy
Baby names finder
Baby name inspiration
Popular baby names 2022
Numerology calculator
Gender-neutral names
Old-fashioned names
See all in Baby names
Your baby week by week
Baby milestones by month
Baby rash types
Baby poop chart
Ways to soothe a crying baby
Safe co-sleeping
Teething signs
Growth spurts
See all in Baby
Your toddler month by month
Toddler development milestones
Dealing with tantrums
Toddler meals
Food & fussy eating
When to start potty training
Moving from a cot to a bed
Help your child sleep through
Games & activities
Vomiting: what's normal?
See all in Toddler
Your child month by month
Food ideas & nutrition
How kids learn to share
Coping with aggression
Bedtime battles
Anxiety in children
Dealing with public tantrums
Great play ideas
Is your child ready for school?Top tips for starting school
See all in Preschooler
Postnatal symptoms to watch out for
Stitches after birth
Postpartum blood clots
Baby showers
Sex secrets for parents
See all in Life as a parent
Best baby products
Best formula and bottles for a windy baby
Best car seats if you need three to fit
Best nappies
Best Moses baskets
Best baby registries
Best baby sleeping bags
Best baby humidifier
Best baby monitors
Best baby bath seat
Best baby food
See all in Baby essentials
Back pain in pregnancy
Pelvic girdle pain
Perineal massage
Signs you're having a boy
Signs you're having a girl
Can you take fish oil while pregnant?
18 weeks pregnant bump
Can you eat salami when pregnant?
Edwards' syndrome
Missed miscarriage
Should I harvest my colostrum?
Rhesus positive vs. Rhesus negative
What do contractions feel like?
Hunger in early pregnancy
First poop after birth
When do babies sit up?
When can babies have salt?
MMR vaccine rash
Vaping while breastfeeding
How to transition from formula to milk
When do babies start grabbing things?
Sperm allergy: can sperm cause itching?
How long after taking folic acid can I get pregnant?

23 signs you're having a boy

There are lots of old wives' tales that claim to predict the sex of your baby. You probably won't be surprised to hear most of them have little to no scientific evidence behind them. In fact, the only way to really find out what you're having is your 20-week scan.

Your baby's heartbeat is lower than 140 beats per minute.
You're carrying all out front.
You're carrying low.
You're blooming in pregnancy.
You didn't suffer from morning sickness in your first trimester.
Your right breast is bigger than your left.
You look at yourself in the mirror for at least a minute and your pupils dilate.
You crave salty food or protein, such as Cheese and meat.
Your feet become cold more quickly than before you were pregnant.
You tie your wedding ring to some thread, hang it over your stomach and it moves in circles.
Your skin becomes dry.
You combine your age at the time of conception with the number of the month you conceived and the resulting number is even.
Your hair has become more full-bodied and shiny during pregnancy .
The hair on your legs has been growing faster during pregnancy.
You are more prone to headaches .
Your pillow faces north when you sleep.
You're asked to show your hands and you present them palms down.
You lie on your left side when sleeping .
Your urine is bright yellow.
You were the more aggressive partner during love-making when you conceived.
You eat a clove of garlic and the smell seeps out of your pores.
Your previous child's first word was "dada".
In ultrasound pictures, you notice that your baby has a sloping forehead and a squared lower jaw. This is called skull theory, and many mums swear by it!

Looking for the best deal on baby gear?

Was this article helpful?

21 signs you're having a girl

Baby gender predictor: boy or girl?

Can my baby’s movements predict if I’m having a boy or a girl?

Two pregnant women sitting next to each other on a sofa, smiling and talking

Twin pregnancy symptoms: 11 early signs

Two baby twins on their tummy looking at the camera

Where to go next

Fetal Presentation, Position, and Lie (Including Breech Presentation)

Variations in Fetal Position and Presentation |

During pregnancy, the fetus can be positioned in many different ways inside the mother's uterus. The fetus may be head up or down or facing the mother's back or front. At first, the fetus can move around easily or shift position as the mother moves. Toward the end of the pregnancy the fetus is larger, has less room to move, and stays in one position. How the fetus is positioned has an important effect on delivery and, for certain positions, a cesarean delivery is necessary. There are medical terms that describe precisely how the fetus is positioned, and identifying the fetal position helps doctors to anticipate potential difficulties during labor and delivery.

Presentation refers to the part of the fetus’s body that leads the way out through the birth canal (called the presenting part). Usually, the head leads the way, but sometimes the buttocks (breech presentation), shoulder, or face leads the way.

Position refers to whether the fetus is facing backward (occiput anterior) or forward (occiput posterior). The occiput is a bone at the back of the baby's head. Therefore, facing backward is called occiput anterior (facing the mother’s back and facing down when the mother lies on her back). Facing forward is called occiput posterior (facing toward the mother's pubic bone and facing up when the mother lies on her back).

Lie refers to the angle of the fetus in relation to the mother and the uterus. Up-and-down (with the baby's spine parallel to mother's spine, called longitudinal) is normal, but sometimes the lie is sideways (transverse) or at an angle (oblique).

For these aspects of fetal positioning, the combination that is the most common, safest, and easiest for the mother to deliver is the following:

Head first (called vertex or cephalic presentation)

Facing backward (occiput anterior position)

Spine parallel to mother's spine (longitudinal lie)

Neck bent forward with chin tucked

Arms folded across the chest

If the fetus is in a different position, lie, or presentation, labor may be more difficult, and a normal vaginal delivery may not be possible.

Variations in fetal presentation, position, or lie may occur when

The fetus is too large for the mother's pelvis (fetopelvic disproportion).

The uterus is abnormally shaped or contains growths such as fibroids .

The fetus has a birth defect .

There is more than one fetus (multiple gestation).

Position and Presentation of the Fetus

Toward the end of pregnancy, the fetus moves into position for delivery. Normally, the presentation is vertex (head first), and the position is occiput anterior (facing toward the pregnant person's spine) and with the face and body angled to one side and the neck flexed.

Variations in fetal presentations include face, brow, breech, and shoulder. Occiput posterior position (facing forward, toward the mother's pubic bone) is less common than occiput anterior position (facing backward, toward the mother's spine).

Variations in Fetal Position and Presentation

Some variations in position and presentation that make delivery difficult occur frequently.

Occiput posterior position

In occiput posterior position (sometimes called sunny-side up), the fetus is head first (vertex presentation) but is facing forward (toward the mother's pubic bone—that is, facing up when the mother lies on her back). This is a very common position that is not abnormal, but it makes delivery more difficult than when the fetus is in the occiput anterior position (facing toward the mother's spine—that is facing down when the mother lies on her back).

When a fetus faces up, the neck is often straightened rather than bent,which requires more room for the head to pass through the birth canal. Delivery assisted by a vacuum device or forceps or cesarean delivery may be necessary.

Breech presentation

In breech presentation, the baby's buttocks or sometimes the feet are positioned to deliver first (before the head).

When delivered vaginally, babies that present buttocks first are more at risk of injury or even death than those that present head first.

The reason for the risks to babies in breech presentation is that the baby's hips and buttocks are not as wide as the head. Therefore, when the hips and buttocks pass through the cervix first, the passageway may not be wide enough for the head to pass through. In addition, when the head follows the buttocks, the neck may be bent slightly backwards. The neck being bent backward increases the width required for delivery as compared to when the head is angled forward with the chin tucked, which is the position that is easiest for delivery. Thus, the baby’s body may be delivered and then the head may get caught and not be able to pass through the birth canal. When the baby’s head is caught, this puts pressure on the umbilical cord in the birth canal, so that very little oxygen can reach the baby. Brain damage due to lack of oxygen is more common among breech babies than among those presenting head first.

In a first delivery, these problems may occur more frequently because a woman’s tissues have not been stretched by previous deliveries. Because of risk of injury or even death to the baby, cesarean delivery is preferred when the fetus is in breech presentation, unless the doctor is very experienced with and skilled at delivering breech babies or there is not an adequate facility or equipment to safely perform a cesarean delivery.

Breech presentation is more likely to occur in the following circumstances:

Labor starts too soon (preterm labor).

The uterus is abnormally shaped or contains abnormal growths such as fibroids .

Breech, posterior, transverse lie: What position is my baby in?

Fetal presentation, or how your baby is situated in your womb at birth, is determined by the body part that's positioned to come out first, and it can affect the way you deliver. At the time of delivery, 97 percent of babies are head-down (cephalic presentation). But there are several other possibilities, including feet or bottom first (breech) as well as sideways (transverse lie) and diagonal (oblique lie).

Fetal presentation and position

During the last trimester of your pregnancy, your provider will check your baby's presentation by feeling your belly to locate the head, bottom, and back. If it's unclear, your provider may do an ultrasound or an internal exam to feel what part of the baby is in your pelvis.

Fetal position refers to whether the baby is facing your spine (anterior position) or facing your belly (posterior position). Fetal position can change often: Your baby may be face up at the beginning of labor and face down at delivery.

Here are the many possibilities for fetal presentation and position in the womb.

Medical illustrations by Jonathan Dimes

Head down, facing down (anterior position)

A baby who is head down and facing your spine is in the anterior position. This is the most common fetal presentation and the easiest position for a vaginal delivery.

This position is also known as "occiput anterior" because the back of your baby's skull (occipital bone) is in the front (anterior) of your pelvis.

Head down, facing up (posterior position)

In the posterior position , your baby is head down and facing your belly. You may also hear it called "sunny-side up" because babies who stay in this position are born facing up. But many babies who are facing up during labor rotate to the easier face down (anterior) position before birth.

Posterior position is formally known as "occiput posterior" because the back of your baby's skull (occipital bone) is in the back (posterior) of your pelvis.

Frank breech

In the frank breech presentation, both the baby's legs are extended so that the feet are up near the face. This is the most common type of breech presentation. Breech babies are difficult to deliver vaginally, so most arrive by c-section .

Some providers will attempt to turn your baby manually to the head down position by applying pressure to your belly. This is called an external cephalic version , and it has a 58 percent success rate for turning breech babies. For more information, see our article on breech birth .

Complete breech

A complete breech is when your baby is bottom down with hips and knees bent in a tuck or cross-legged position. If your baby is in a complete breech, you may feel kicking in your lower abdomen.

Incomplete breech

In an incomplete breech, one of the baby's knees is bent so that the foot is tucked next to the bottom with the other leg extended, positioning that foot closer to the face.

Single footling breech

In the single footling breech presentation, one of the baby's feet is pointed toward your cervix.

Double footling breech

In the double footling breech presentation, both of the baby's feet are pointed toward your cervix.

Transverse lie

In a transverse lie, the baby is lying horizontally in your uterus and may be facing up toward your head or down toward your feet. Babies settle this way less than 1 percent of the time, but it happens more commonly if you're carrying multiples or deliver before your due date.

If your baby stays in a transverse lie until the end of your pregnancy, it can be dangerous for delivery. Your provider will likely schedule a c-section or attempt an external cephalic version , which is highly successful for turning babies in this position.

Oblique lie

In rare cases, your baby may lie diagonally in your uterus, with his rump facing the side of your body at an angle.

Like the transverse lie, this position is more common earlier in pregnancy, and it's likely your provider will intervene if your baby is still in the oblique lie at the end of your third trimester.

Was this article helpful?

9 of the most jaw-dropping breech birth photos

baby with umbilical cord getting delivered

What to know if your baby is breech

What's a sunny-side up baby?

11 stunning photos of placentas

BabyCenter's editorial team is committed to providing the most helpful and trustworthy pregnancy and parenting information in the world. When creating and updating content, we rely on credible sources: respected health organizations, professional groups of doctors and other experts, and published studies in peer-reviewed journals. We believe you should always know the source of the information you're seeing. Learn more about our editorial and medical review policies .

Ahmad A et al. 2014. Association of fetal position at onset of labor and mode of delivery: A prospective cohort study. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology 43(2):176-182. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23929533 Opens a new window [Accessed September 2021]

Gray CJ and Shanahan MM. 2019. Breech presentation. StatPearls. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK448063/ Opens a new window [Accessed September 2021]

Hankins GD. 1990. Transverse lie. American Journal of Perinatology 7(1):66-70. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2131781 Opens a new window [Accessed September 2021]

Medline Plus. 2020. Your baby in the birth canal. U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002060.htm Opens a new window [Accessed September 2021]

Where to go next

How to Tell if You’re Having a Boy or Girl on an Ultrasound

How does a “gender ultrasound” work, how accurate is a gender ultrasound, how to tell if it’s a boy on an ultrasound, how to tell if it’s a girl on an ultrasound.

While it's not foolproof, a second trimester ultrasound done around week 20 of pregnancy can often answer your “boy or girl?” questions fairly accurately. So once you hear the happy news in the doctor’s office, you can start buying baby gear accordingly and sharing the secret with loved ones — unless you decide to keep it a surprise until the very end!

What to Expect When You're Expecting , 5th edition, Heidi Murkoff. WhatToExpect.com, Level 2 Ultrasound: The 20-Week Anatomy Scan , April 2019 WhatToExpect.com, Ultrasound During Pregnancy , April 2021. WhatToExpect.com, Noninvasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) , December 2020. WhatToExpect.com, Amniocentesis , November 2020. WhatToExpect.com, Chorionic Villus Sampling (CVS) , April 2021. WhatToExpect.com, 9 Scientific Signs That You're Having a Boy or a Girl , May 2021. WhatToExpect.com, When Your Baby’s Sex Is Determined , July 2021. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Ultrasound Exams , June 2020. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, How Your Fetus Grows During Pregnancy , August 2020. Food and Drug Administration, Ultrasound Imaging , September 2020. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine, Accuracy of Sonographic Fetal Gender Determination: Predictions Made by Sonographers During Routine Obstetric Ultrasound Scans , August 2014. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine, The Ultrasound Identification of Fetal Gender at the Gestational Age of 11–12 Weeks , January 2018. ScienceDirect, Genital Tubercle , 2021.

About What to Expect

Patterns of Gender Development

Carol lynn martin.

1 Arizona State University, School of Social and Family Dynamics, Program in Family and Human Development, Tempe, Arizona 85287-3701; ude.usa@nitramc

Diane N. Ruble

2 Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, New York 10003; [email protected]

A comprehensive theory of gender development must describe and explain long-term developmental patterning and changes and how gender is experienced in the short term. This review considers multiple views on gender patterning, illustrated with contemporary research. First, because developmental research involves understanding normative patterns of change with age, several theoretically important topics illustrate gender development: how children come to recognize gender distinctions and understand stereotypes, and the emergence of prejudice and sexism. Second, developmental researchers study the stability of individual differences over time, which elucidates developmental processes. We review stability in two domains—sex segregation and activities/interests. Finally, a new approach advances understanding of developmental patterns, based on dynamic systems theory. Dynamic systems theory is a metatheoretical framework for studying stability and change, which developed from the study of complex and nonlinear systems in physics and mathematics. Some major features and examples show how dynamic approaches have been and could be applied in studying gender development.

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the changes that correspond with the passage of time is a hallmark of developmental studies, including the study of gender development. Gender developmental scientists are concerned with age-related changes in gender typing, and more broadly, with many issues about the emergence and patterning of gendered behaviors and thinking. Description of these changes is vitally important as it informs theoretical approaches to gender development. Using a broad lens on age-related changes provides important information describing how development occurs, but shorter time frames are also useful for identifying processes that may underlie developmental patterns. Gender developmental scientists are beginning to conceptualize temporal change and measurement of relevant variables over time in more nuanced ways and with new methods and analytic strategies.

Our goal in this article is not to provide an extensive review of changes in gender over childhood, but instead to focus on the perspective of developmental patterning. In selecting issues to review, we attempted to find a set of issues that would provide insights into processes underlying gender development while also being representative of contemporary issues and future directions in the field. First, to highlight developmentalists' interest in average or normative changes across age, we review the timeline of gender development for the emergence of gender understanding and stereotyping and how discrimination and prejudice develop in childhood. Second, we examine continuities within individuals over time as an important theoretical complement to the first focus on mean-level, normative patterns over time. Longitudinal studies are reviewed to examine whether individual differences are stable over time in two areas of gender typing: sex segregation and activities and interests. Finally, we discuss how dynamic systems theory may be applied in gender development and describe its potential for understanding patterns over different time frames.

HOW EARLY DO CHILDREN ACQUIRE GENDER CONCEPTS AND EXHIBIT PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION?

The first few years of life and into adolescence have been the focus of much theorizing and empirical research on gender development. Major questions have arisen about the timeline of gender development, and resolving these issues is central to understanding processes underlying gender development. In this section, we discuss two key aspects of gender development. First, the earliest emergence of gender understanding and behaviors provides insights about the origins of sex differences and the prominence of gender as a social category, and so it is not surprising that these topics have been highlighted in contemporary research on gender development. Second, because of the far-ranging implications on human social interactions, we review research evidence concerning the emergence of gender prejudice and discrimination.

Do Infants Understand and Use Gender?

A major issue that has driven research is whether children's basic understanding of gender identity motivates and organizes the development of gender-typed behaviors, an idea proposed by “self-socialization” theories of gender development. Self-socialization perspectives posit that children actively seek information about what gender means and how it applies to them and that an understanding of gender categories motivates behavior such that, in essence, they socialize themselves (see Martin et al. 2002 ). In contrast, others ( Bussey & Bandura 1999 , Campbell et al. 2002 ) have argued that gender understanding must not play an important role in the emergence of gendered behaviors because some gender-typed behaviors emerge prior to age two, presumably earlier than children's understanding or identification with gender. The evidence needed to resolve this controversy concerns whether behavior becomes increasingly gender typed with the onset of basic gender understanding, and recent findings have extended our knowledge of these fundamental issues. Much has been written about these topics and about the surrounding controversies ( Bandura & Bussey 2004 ; Martin et al. 2002 , 2004 ); here, we provide an overview and update of the evidence.

When do children begin to recognize that there are two types of people—males and females—and when are they able to link this information to other qualities to form basic stereotypes? A related question is, when do children recognize their own sex? Infants as young as three to four months of age distinguish between categories of female and male faces, as demonstrated in habituation and preferential looking paradigms ( Quinn et al. 2002 ). By about six months, infants can discriminate faces and voices by sex, habituate to faces of both sexes, and make intermodal associations between faces and voices (e.g., Fagan & Singer 1979 , Miller 1983 , Younger & Fearing 1999 ). By 10 months, infants are able to form stereotypic associations between faces of women and men and gender-typed objects (e.g., a scarf, a hammer), suggesting that they have the capacity to form primitive stereotypes ( Levy & Haaf 1994 ). Infants' early associative networks about the sexes may not carry the same conceptual or affective associations that characterize those of older children or adults, although the nature of these associations has yet to be examined in any depth (see Martin et al. 2002 ).

Because of the difficulties associated with testing infants, it has been challenging to determine when children first recognize their own or others' sex. Early studies suggested that labeling and understanding of gender may not emerge until about 30 months of age, but more recent studies have moved the age of understanding gender identity and labeling downward. In a study using a preferential looking paradigm, about 50% of 18-month-old girls showed knowledge of gender labels (“lady,” “man”), but boys did not, and 50% of 18- and 24-month-old boys and girls showed above-chance understanding of the label “boy” ( Poulin-Dubois et al. 1998 ). In another non-verbal testing situation, 24- and 30-month old children knew the gender groups to which they and others belonged ( Stennes et al. 2005 ). Similarly, most 24- and 28-month-old children select the correct picture in response to gender labels provided by an experimenter ( Campbell et al. 2002 , Levy 1999 ).

A recent study examined the naturally occurring instances of gender labels (e.g., girl, boy, woman, man, lady, guy) as indicators of knowledge of gender categories and assessed whether the onset of use of these terms related to children's observed free play with toys ( Zosuls et al. 2009 ). Information about gender labels was obtained from examining biweekly parent diaries of children's speech from 10 months of age onward. Zosuls and colleagues (2009) also analyzed videotapes of the children at 17 months and 21 months playing with a set of toys varying from high to neutral in gender typing. The results showed that 25% of children used gender labels by 17 months and 68% by 21 months. On average, girls produced labels at 18 months, one month earlier than did boys. These labeling results were used to predict changes in gender-typed behavior with the two most strongly gender-typed toys (trucks and dolls). Children who knew and used gender labels were more likely than other children to show increases in gender-typed play with toys.

Taken together, these studies suggest that most children develop the ability to label gender groups and to use gender labels in their speech between 18 and 24 months. As proposed by self-socialization theorists, the results from the Zosuls et al. study (2009) suggest that developing this ability has consequences: Knowing basic gender information was related to increased play with strongly stereotyped toys. These findings are consistent with research suggesting that children develop awareness of their own “self ” at roughly 18 months and then begin to actively engage in information seeking about what things mean and how they should behave ( Baldwin & Moses 1996 ).

When Do Children Develop Stereotypes?

Developmental researchers have identified that rudimentary stereotypes develop by about two years of age ( Kuhn et al. 1978 ), and many children develop basic stereotypes by age three ( Signorella et al. 1993 ). Children first show an understanding of sex differences associated with adult possessions (e.g., shirt and tie), physical appearance, roles, toys, and activities, and recognize some abstract associations with gender (e.g., hardness as male; softness as female) ( Leinbach et al. 1997 , Weinraub et al. 1984 ). Children develop stereotypes about physical aggression at an early age, and by age 41½, children believe that girls show more relational aggression than boys ( Giles & Heyman 2005 ). Interestingly, even when researchers examine children's spontaneous associations about boys and girls, a consistent pattern is found from preschool through fourth/fifth grade: girls are seen as nice, wearing dresses, and liking dolls, and boys are seen as having short hair, playing active games, and being rough ( Miller et al. 2009 ).

As children grow older, the range of stereotypes about sports, occupations, school tasks, and adult roles expands, and the nature of the associations becomes more sophisticated (e.g., Sinno & Killen 2009 ). Specifically, early in childhood, children make vertical associations between the category label (“girls,” “boys”) and qualities (e.g., “boys like trucks”). They appear slower to make horizontal inferences (e.g., recognizing that trucks and airplanes are associated with being “masculine”), which tend to appear around age eight. For instance, when told about an unfamiliar sex-unspecified child who likes trucks, older children but not younger ones predict that the child also likes playing with airplanes ( Martin et al. 1990 ). Concreteness of gendered items influences the ability of younger children to make these property-to-property inferences ( Bauer et al. 1998 ). In contrast, adults often rely on individuating information rather than the person's sex to make similar types of judgments ( Deaux & Lewis 1984 ). The difficulty that children have with these judgments suggests that they may not understand within-sex individual differences.

Meta-analytic studies find that stereotypes become more flexible with age ( Signorella et al. 1993 ). A longitudinal study of children from 5 to 10 years of age showed a peak in the rigidity of stereotypes at either 5 or 6 years of age and then an increase in flexibility two years later. Neither the timing nor the level of peak rigidity affected the developmental trajectory, suggesting that children generally follow the same normative path across development despite variations in when rigidity starts and how extreme it becomes ( Trautner et al. 2005 ).

Many questions remain to be answered about the developmental progression in learning the content of stereotypes and in exploring individual differences in patterns of development. For instance, when do children first begin to assume that there are similarities within one sex and dissimilarities between the sexes? Theorists are interested in examining the roles that personal interests and idiosyncratic knowledge play in the development or hindrance in stereotype formation ( Liben & Bigler 2002 , Martin & Ruble 2004 ). Furthermore, how children apply stereotypes once they have learned them is an issue of continuing interest in the field.

When Do Children Exhibit Prejudice and Discrimination?

Recent conceptual analyses suggest a range of factors that likely contribute to the development of stereotypes and prejudice, such as highly salient categorizing dimensions (e.g., sex) ( Martin & Ruble 2004 ) and labeling of these dimensions by others ( Bigler et al. 1997 ). Because recent reviews of Developmental Intergroup Theory have covered the influence of these factors and discussed studies of children's responses to novel stereotyping situations ( Arthur et al. 2008 , Bigler & Liben 2007 ), the focus here is on the age-related changes in cognitive and behavioral expressions of gender prejudice and discrimination, not with their origins.

Attitudes about the two sexes

How do children's evaluations of the two sexes change with age? This question involves a number of different kinds of attitudes and beliefs; we focus on two: ( a ) ingroup/outgroup biases, and ( b ) perceptions of status differences and discrimination. There has been relatively little research on these topics, but interest has increased recently.

Ingroup/outgroup biases

Children's growing awareness of membership in a social group (i.e., male or female) becomes an evaluative process through self-identification and thus affects how positively children regard the ingroup relative to the outgroup ( Ruble et al. 2004 ). Some research suggests that as early as preschool, children report feeling more positively about their own sex ( Yee & Brown 1994 ), and differential liking is also seen among older children (e.g., Heyman 2001 , Verkuyten & Thijs 2001 ). Studies are mixed regarding age trends, depending on the measure. Those examining negative versus positive trait ratings suggest that intergroup biases decline in elementary school (e.g., Egan & Perry 2001 , Powlishta et al. 1994 ), consistent with increasing stereotype flexibility described above; but studies tapping more affective reactions (e.g., liking the ingroup better) do not show this decline (e.g., Yee & Brown 1994 ), at least not until early adolescence ( Verkuyten & Thijs 2001 ).

We do not yet know whether and when ingroup favoritism is associated with outgroup derogation. That is, do children actually dislike or have hostile attitudes toward the other sex, or is it simply that children like their own sex better? Because many studies use difference scores, ingroup positivity and outgroup negativity are often confounded ( Brewer 2001 , Cameron et al. 2001 ). Moreover, Kowalski (2007) reports that studies of young children's interactions do involve evaluative comments between boys and girls but rarely involve animosity, suggesting that some researchers may have misinterpreted children's positive ingroup feelings in structured interviews as overt rejection of the other group. Recent research suggests that when they are decoupled, ingroup positivity effects are stronger than outgroup negativity among elementary school children ( Susskind & Hodges 2007 ). It is also not clear whether young girls' willingness to judge boys as “bad,” for example, indicates outright hostility ( Rudman & Glick 2008 ) or if, instead, such judgments reflect stereotypes about boys getting into trouble (e.g., Heyman 2001 ). On the other hand, studies showing that the other sex is disliked (e.g., Yee & Brown 1994 ) are consistent with a conclusion of negative outgroup evaluation. An important issue for future research concerns this distinction between cognitive and affective aspects of intergroup bias and its connection to the development of gender prejudice ( Halim & Ruble 2009 ).

A distinction in the adult literature between hostile and benevolent sexism ( Glick & Fiske 2001 ) represents a potentially very useful conceptualization for future developmental research. The idea is that, unlike most forms of prejudice toward outgroups, negative intergroup attitudes between males and females are likely to be complicated by intimate interdependence and thus are likely to be ambivalent, involving benevolent as well as hostile aspects. For example, women may be viewed as competitors seeking to gain power over men, but they may also be viewed as angelic (put on a pedestal) and vulnerable, in need of protection. Men may be resented for their dominance over women but also admired as providers and heroes. Applying this distinction to the developmental course of intergroup attitudes, Rudman & Glick (2008) argued that ambivalence does not characterize gender prejudice in young children, but rather that it moves from a simple form of childhood hostility toward competing groups to ambivalent sexism.

This is an interesting proposal with important implications, but questions remain. First, outgroup negativity in young children can be interpreted differently, as suggested above; their perceptions may be simple and competitive, but not extreme enough to be characterized as hostile. Perhaps, instead, children's need to master important categorical distinctions coupled with relatively limited cognitive skills make it threatening when peers cross gender boundaries ( Kowalski 2007 ). Second, young children's attitudes may involve some complexity and ambivalence, but of a different sort than for adults. For example, young children may dislike members of the other sex because they are boring (about girls) or rough (about boys) while still holding positive views about other characteristics of other-sex peers, such as girls are nice and boys play exciting games. Moreover, children begin to anticipate adult roles at an early age, and benevolent feelings could arise from a “princess” anticipating her “prince” or the expectation by two young opposite-sex friends that they will one day be husband and wife. Further examination of different interpretations of preschoolers' ingroup bias is important because knowing what it represents is critical to knowing when to intervene to minimize sexism.

Awareness of status differences and discrimination

When do children become aware of the status difference applied to males and masculine activities relative to females and feminine activities in most cultures? Although studies of gender stereotypes in young children show that they attribute greater power to males and helplessness to females ( Ruble et al. 2006 ), only a few studies have examined perceptions of inequality directly. First, research has found awareness of status differences in occupations typically held by men and women ( Liben et al. 2001 , Teig & Susskind 2008 ). Children as young as 6 years understood that jobs more likely to be held by men (e.g., business executive) are higher in status than female-typical jobs, but only older children (11-year-olds) associated fictitious “male” jobs as being higher in status ( Liben et al. 2001 ). A study of perceptions of a high-status job—the U.S. presidency—found that 87% of children aged 5–10 years knew that only men had been presidents, though knowledge increased significantly with age ( Bigler et al. 2008 ).

Second, research has examined the development of children's general perceptions of gender inequalities ( Neff et al. 2007 ). The findings showed a notable increase between 7 and 15 years of age in beliefs that males are granted more power and respect than females.

Finally, a few recent studies examined children's perceptions of gender discrimination. First, in the study of the presidency, only approximately 30% of the 5- to 10-year-old children attributed the lack of women presidents to discrimination, although this percentage increased with age. Instead, the most frequent explanation was ingroup bias: that men would not vote for women. These findings suggest that even young children are aware of how ingroup biases shape behavior and that they perceive such reasons as more important than institutional discrimination in determining the selection of the president ( Bigler et al. 2008 ). In a second study, children in two age groups (5–7 and 8–10 years) responded to a set of hypothetical stories about teachers deciding whether a boy or a girl did better on an activity ( Brown & Bigler 2005 ). The findings showed that the younger children were somewhat aware of gender discrimination, but such perceptions were higher in the older group. Children perceived discrimination, however, only when explicitly told that the teacher may be biased, not when the context was ambiguous.

Taken together, these studies suggest that children's awareness of the differential status of the sexes and gender discrimination are relatively late-developing phenomena. Young children show limited awareness, but only when contextual cues (e.g., explicit mention of biases) or social experiences (knowledge of status of real occupations) make inequities obvious. More subtle awareness of inequities may not emerge until later in elementary school. The slow development of this more “public” evaluation, such as recognizing status and power differences and institutional discrimination, is in stark contrast to the early developing “personal” regard shown by ingroup biases, suggesting different developmental underpinnings of the two types.

Gender prejudice and discrimination

In what ways might developmental changes in stereotypic beliefs and intergroup attitudes play out in actual choices and behavior? What little research there is on gender prejudice development has primarily focused on two types: ( a ) negative reactions to peers' violations of gender norms and ( b ) preferential treatment.

Reactions to gender norm violations

Because preschoolers have strong beliefs that boys and girls do different things, they would be expected to respond negatively to gender norm violations. Several early studies found support for this prediction ( Huston 1983 ). For example, when 3- to 5-year-olds were videotaped while playing with either a male- or female-typed toy (e.g., soldiers; dollhouse) in the presence of a same-sex peer, children were punished (e.g., ridiculed) by the peer when playing with cross-sex toys ( Langlois & Downs 1980 ).

Recent research has supported and expanded these findings. For example, teachers report that kindergarten children tend to respond in one of three ways to gender norm violations: correction (“give that girl puppet to a girl”), ridicule, and “identity negation” (e.g., “Jeff is a girl”) ( Kowalski 2007 ). Interestingly, one recent study found that preschool children are able to identify children who are more likely to enforce the gender rules and gender-segregated boundaries ( McGuire et al. 2007 ). Preschoolers were asked, “Who in your classroom says you shouldn't play because you are a boy/girl?” The findings showed that children who had greater exposure to “gender enforcer” peers were more likely to limit their play to same-sex peers. These findings suggest that there may be individual differences in overt “sexist” behavior as early as preschool, and that the actions of these gender “police” contribute more broadly to the maintenance of gender distinctions in the classroom.

Because children show age-related increases in the flexibility of stereotypes and other aspects of gender category knowledge, such as gender constancy and the ability to make multiple classifications, their negative reactions to gender norm violations should decline after preschool. Unfortunately, age trends in older children have received little attention, though examples of such behavior abound. Based on extensive qualitative ethnographic observations in middle-elementary school, Thorne (1993) found that boys who violated norms for masculinity were teased, shunned, or referred to as “girls.” For example, one girl excluded a boy from jump rope because “…you don't know how to do it, to swing it. You gotta be a girl” (p. 45). Other research documented the various “rules” that children have about maintaining gender boundaries and found that children who maintain boundaries are more popular with peers ( Sroufe et al. 1993 ). Finally, research with children exhibiting extreme gender-nonnormative behaviors suggests that girls and especially boys are teased and rejected by peers ( Zucker & Bradley 1995 ).

Studies using hypothetical stories also indicate that children make negative judgments of, and consider unpopular, peers who engage in gender-atypical behavior, especially boys. In contrast to the implications from the more behavioral studies described above, however, many of these studies fail to find negative evaluations of gender-atypical behaviors before middle-elementary school (e.g., Berndt & Heller 1986 ), and children often show increased negativity with age, although findings are mixed ( Ruble et al. 2006 ). The findings in the judgment studies may be influenced by the qualities and salience of the stimuli as well as by children's cognitive abilities and gender knowledge ( Arthur et al. 2008 , Lutz & Ruble 1995 ). For example, one recent study showed a dramatic decrease in negative judgments between 5 and 7 years of age, which was mediated by increasing gender knowledge—specifically, gender constancy ( Ruble et al. 2007b ).

Thus, conclusions about evidence of sexism in young children drawn from judgment studies can be different from conclusions drawn from studies of actual behaviors. This observation raises interesting questions for future about what exactly children are reacting to when they demonstrate seemingly sexist behaviors or attitudes toward peers engaging in atypical behavior. First, children's liking or popularity judgments in hypothetical situations may reflect egocentric considerations, such as preferring targets engaged in activities typical of their own sex (e.g., girls preferring male targets with feminine interests) ( Alexander & Hines 1994 , Zucker et al. 1995 ). Thus, young children's liking for gender nonconforming targets may not reflect their tolerance for gender nonconformity but instead their personal interest in masculine or feminine activities.

Second, it is not clear if the sexist behaviors found in preschool children (e.g., hitting a boy who wears fingernail polish) are based on global negative evaluations of such children as being gender atypical or if they reflect a more limited evaluation of a specific instance of a child breaking a rule (such as stealing cookies). Children's judgments of gender atypicality are likely influenced by additional factors such as their perceptions of the targets' dissimilarity to same-sex others (e.g., Egan & Perry 2001 ) and/or awareness of within-sex variability. Moreover, it may be only when children begin to recognize and understand the stability of behavior that individual atypical behaviors coalesce into a broader and more negative view of the person as being deviant ( Ruble & Dweck 1995 ). Unfortunately, developmental changes in children's perceptions of others' gender typicality have received little attention. This is surprising because perceptions of gender typicality are key to understanding reactions to gender norm violations and what they mean. Whether preschoolers' negative judgments and reactions reflect sexism and, if so, what form of sexism are interesting questions for future research.

Preferential treatment

Given that the in-group liking bias occurs at a young age, one might expect that children would show favoritism toward their own sex. When affiliative behavior is measured, children begin to show preferential selection of same-sex peers starting at age 3 ( La Freniere et al. 1984 ). Children also preferentially allocate resources to their own-sex group, beginning in preschool ( Yee & Brown 1994 ).

Other research has examined ingroup favoritism in terms of children's responses to hypothetical stories about excluding peers from gender stereotypic activities, such as a ballet or baseball “club” ( Killen et al. 2008 ). In these studies, there has been little evidence that children were more likely to choose same-sex members. Instead, children's exclusion and inclusion decisions were found to vary across age depending on exactly what they were told about the situation. When children were asked about a single child who wanted to join the club, most children responded that exclusion was wrong (e.g., to exclude a boy from a ballet club), even though they knew the stereotypes. Consistent with findings of increasing flexibility of stereotypes with age, however, this was true for only about 60% of preschoolers ( Theimer et al. 2001 ) versus 90% of older children ( Killen & Stangor 2001 ). When children were asked to select between a boy and a girl of equal competence, age differences in the influence of gender stereotypes on inclusion decisions appeared to be even stronger. Children in the study of preschoolers selected the stereotyped choice (e.g., the girl for the ballet class) ( Theimer et al. 2001 ). Older children, however, preferred the counterstereotypic choice ( Killen & Stangor, 2001 ) and offered justifications based on equal access (e.g., boys don't get a chance to take ballet). Such “fairness” considerations in inclusion decisions coupled with relatively low levels of exclusion are surprising in that they seem inconsistent with the observations of behavioral exclusion described above. Perhaps only a few children engage in exclusion (e.g., the “gender police”), or hypothetical situations might allow children to think instead of answering impulsively and thus may not invoke ingroup favoritism as much as more personal, immediate situations might.

In short, it appears that gender prejudice and discrimination begin as early as preschool; this finding is particularly evident in research examining actual behavior, whether naturalistic or experimental. That is, preschoolers respond negatively to violations of gender norms and favor ingroup members in actual choices of play partners (sex segregation) and allocation of resources. Findings of studies examining responses in hypothetical situations appear to be more mixed, however. From these studies, it appears that the form and bases of gender prejudice and discrimination vary across age and context. For example, in young children, prejudice may reflect simple same-sex liking biases or relatively straightforward applications of gender norms, whereas at older ages, prejudice may involve differential evaluation of capabilities and past history and thus be more closely linked to knowledge of status differences and discrimination. The few studies examining these issues have involved very different paradigms. Thus, findings that apparently conflict across studies cannot be evaluated without future research.

HOW STABLE ARE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN GENDER TYPING?

It seems intuitively obvious that individuals vary greatly in how gender typed they are. Some girls are extremely “girly” and refuse to go anywhere without wearing a dress, often pink and frilly, whereas other girls have no such interest and instead prefer playing ball with the boys. Some men can handle any kind of tool (except kitchen tools!), whereas others lack such mechanical facility. It is commonly assumed that attributes associated with being a typical male or female are seen early on, show at least some continuity across time, and influence personal preferences and behaviors throughout life.

How much empirical support is there for these assumptions? Maccoby (2002) has argued that there is not much. According to her analysis, this is because different manifestations of gender typing in childhood do not cohere and because there is considerable situational variation in how gender typed a given child seems. Instead, she suggests that gender typing at this age may be more of a group phenomenon rather than something that reflects the dispositions of relatively more or less gender-typed children. Thus, she advocates a shift in research focus away from individual differences in gender-related outcomes and toward the study of how gender is manifested in groups of males and females.

Although we agree wholeheartedly about the importance of studying group-based elements of gender, we suggest that it may be premature to dismiss the importance of examining gender typing as an individual difference variable. Variation across contexts and domains of gender typing does not preclude the possibility that some aspects show stability across time within individuals. For example, some boys may show an interest in moving parts or vehicles that persists in different forms into adulthood, even if that interest shows no connection to rough-and-tumble play or to other male-typical interests and behaviors. Surprisingly, researchers have rarely directly examined the stability of gender-typed interests and behaviors, and the existing database is piecemeal and sketchy ( Huston 1983 , Powlishta et al. 1993 ). This is unfortunate, because knowing more about which aspects of gender typing are stable is critical to a full understanding of the nature and processes involved in gender development.

In the sections below, we provide a detailed analysis of longitudinal studies of gender typing in children and what the studies show about stability. We then reevaluate the evidence that led to Maccoby's (2002) conclusions that examining individual differences in gender typing is not productive.

Evidence of the Stability of Gender Typing from Longitudinal Studies

What do longitudinal studies of gender development tell us about stability? Although gender typing can involve a number of different features, we limit the present review to behavioral-type variables (e.g., play with same-sex peers; interests and activities) rather than cognitive-type variables such as stereotyping or gender identity. We do this because much research on gender typing has concerned young children's peer and activity preferences. It is also partly because cognitive variables show considerable variation during childhood ( Ruble et al. 2006 ) and may not be conducive to demonstrating stability, at least in young children.

Surprisingly, the few longitudinal studies of gender typing that exist have paid relatively little attention to this issue of stability. This may be partly because it has not been a primary component of major theories of gender development. Because most theories emphasize the factors that lead to gender typing, longitudinal studies have often focused on such issues as how contextual, socialization, or social-cognitive factors at one point in time affect gender-typing at a later point in time (e.g., McHale et al. 2004 ) rather than on the stability of gender typing across time. Other longitudinal studies have focused on normative changes in gender-typed behaviors or cognitions, such as attitudes or stereotyping (e.g., Bartini 2006 ).

In interpreting the theoretical significance of such studies, however, it is essential to determine whether gender typing represents some continuing characteristic of individuals that influences future beliefs and behaviors or whether it is better viewed as linked to a particular developmental time point or context, with little future implications ( Serbin et al. 1993 ). Moreover, identifying the factors that lead children to be more or less gender typed should help distinguish among alternative theories of gender typing ( Powlishta et al. 1993 ). Thus, information about which elements of gender typing are stable, over what period of time, and during which developmental periods seems essential to the study of gender development.

Longitudinal studies examining the stability of sex segregation

Some studies have used observational methods to examine the stability of preferences for spending time with same-sex versus other-sex others. Different types of assessments have been used: ( a ) split-half correlations (e.g., across odd versus even weeks), ( b ) cross-situational stability (e.g., across indoor and outdoor play); and ( c ) test-retest (temporal) stability (whether sex segregation scores are correlated over some period of time).

The findings have been mixed, both across studies and across measures, and most studies have involved small samples and relatively short time periods (six months or less). To illustrate, Maccoby & Jacklin (1987) reported nonsignificant test-retest reliability over a one-week period among 4½-year-olds (0.39) and among 6½-year-olds (0.17). They did find cross-situational (indoor-outdoor) stability in preschoolers, but for girls only (0.44). Powlishta et al. (1993) used a split-half reliability procedure across odd and even days over a four- to six-month period and found that sex segregation showed significant stability for preschool boys (0.73) but not for girls (0.20). Lloyd & Duveen (1992) found significant temporal stability (0.40) in children ranging in age from about 4 to 7 years when they correlated the proportion of same-sex play from one term to the next. Turner et al. (1993) also examined temporal stability in a large sample (n = 161) of 4- to 4½-year-old children from two countries across eight sessions. Sex segregation scores in sessions one to four were correlated with sessions five to eight at significant or marginal levels (0.3 to 0.7).

As a final example of studies examining relatively short-term stability, Martin & Fabes (2001) assessed sex segregation over two consecutive academic terms for preschool and kindergarten children. Observations took place inside and outside every weekday for six months. This study is unusual because of the large number of observations (about 300 per child) and because of the use of multiple forms of stability assessment. First, split-half procedures (odd and even weeks) showed high and significant correlations for both sexes and for younger and older children (0.69–0.84). Second, as suggested by Epstein (1980) , they calculated stability coefficients with data aggregated over differing lengths of time, a procedure that reduces error of measurement. The one-week coefficients were low (below 0.3), but as the number of weeks of aggregated data increased, the stability coefficients showed large increases, such that when data were aggregated over eight-week periods, stability coefficients rose to the 0.5 to 0.6 range and continued to rise across larger units of time. Finally, they found considerable temporal stability (>0.7) across the two academic terms. These findings suggest that a relatively large number of observations, spread over time, may be needed to observe stability in sex segregation. Thus, prior conclusions about a lack of individual stability in same-sex peer preferences may be misleading.

In short, some longitudinal studies show reasonably impressive stability of individual differences in sex segregation. One problem with these studies, however, is that stability is examined within a group context that does not change. That is, stability may be found not because of individual differences in same-sex preferences, but rather because groups are formed early in the class year, and these structures are maintained ( Maccoby & Jacklin 1987 ). Thus, the results of longitudinal studies involving longer periods of time are of considerable interest.

Unfortunately, few studies have examined temporal stability for longer than six months, and, as with short-duration research, the findings are mixed. For example, Maccoby & Jacklin (1987) examined stability in sex segregation in children across a two-year period (4½ to 6½ years). Given the low level of short-term stability found in this study, as described above, the authors did not expect to find, and did not find, much evidence of temporal stability, except for a significant correlation (0.31) over time for boys, but only for outdoor play. In contrast, Serbin et al. (1993) did find long-term temporal stability from one year to the next using a peer-nomination procedure (e.g., participants selecting photos of the children with whom they most like to play) in 5- to 12-year-olds. It is not clear exactly why this paper-and-pencil measure might yield more stable estimates, but it may be that the situational variation in observations was eliminated and that only the strongest relationships were assessed this way. Regardless, it is impressive that temporal stability was found across a time period when classrooms had changed.

Taken together, despite some nonsignificant findings, it seems fair to conclude that individual differences in sex segregation do show both internal consistency (split-half reliability) and temporal stability, given sufficient power and numbers of observations. Although observational data suggest that a child may vary in same-sex play from week to week, when observations are aggregated across multiple weeks, stability is seen. It would be helpful in future research to use data-aggregation procedures to see how many weeks of observations are needed to show temporal stability across one year or more. It would also be worthwhile to examine how long individual differences in segregation are maintained. For example, do preschool preferences predict preferences in middle-elementary school?

Longitudinal studies of the stability of interests and activity preferences

Studies of other indices of gender typing have been somewhat more consistent in finding temporal stability. Some observational studies of preschoolers and/or kindergartners have shown short-term, test-retest temporal stability in stereotyped toy and activity choices during free play (e.g., Maccoby & Jacklin, 1987 , Martin & Fabes 2001 ). Other observational studies have shown significant stability in terms of split-half consistency (e.g., Connor & Serbin 1977 , Powlishta et al. 1993 ). In addition, gender-stereotyped activity preferences have shown moderate to high stability over varying periods of time, as assessed with test-retest reliability involving pencil-and-paper measures completed either by the children themselves (e.g., Edelbrock & Sugawara 1978 , Golombok & Rust 1993 ) or by parents about their children (e.g., Golombok & Rust 1993 ).

One recent, impressive study examined the stability of gender typing using pencil-and-paper measures ( Golombok et al. 2008 ). This study warrants a more detailed look because it involved a much longer time period (from age 2½ to 8 years) and a much larger sample (more than 2700 girls and 2700 boys) than has been typical. When the children were ages 2½, 3½, and 5 years old, parents completed a toy and activity questionnaire (Pre-School Activities Inventory, or PSAI; Golombok & Rust 1993 ) about their child's preferences; at age 8, the children completed an age-appropriate modified version, the Children's Activities Inventory (CAI). To examine temporal stability during the preschool years (test-retest reliability), intercorrelations in PSAI scores were examined among all three time points (ages 2½, 3½, and 5 years). Stability coefficients for the PSAI were high: 0.6–0.7 for adjacent time points and 0.5 from 2½ to 5 years. These levels are comparable to or even higher than those reported in earlier studies and thus demonstrate moderate to high stability in gender-typed interests and activities over time periods ranging from 1 to 2½ years.

Golombok et al. (2008) also examined stability between the preschool years and age 8, though not with test-retest correlations. Instead, at age 3½, boys and girls separately were divided into nine categories of gender typing based on PSAI scores; children who varied in their categories were compared on CAI scores. For both sexes, the children who were most gender typed at age 3½ continued to be so at age 8. A similar analysis compared CAI scores at age 8 with scores indicating the trajectory (acceleration in gender-typed interests) from ages 2½ to 5 years. As predicted, children showing the greatest increase in gender typing at a young age were those with higher levels of gender-typical behavior at age 8.

These findings are interesting in part because the trends run counter to what would be expected from regression to the mean, in that the children who were most gender typed to start with became relatively more so over time. Moreover, the findings suggested the possibility that individual differences in gender typing may be more stable in children who are relatively high or low in gender typing when young, a pattern that was particularly marked for the least gender-typed girls. It would be of great interest in future research to examine the stability and trajectory of gender typing among children at the extremes, such as tomboys or girly girls.

Taken together, longitudinal studies of gender-typed interests and activities show fairly compelling evidence of stability of individual differences. Future research needs to examine stability across one year or more using observations rather than paper-and-pencil measures to be certain that the apparent stability of gender typing reflects actual behaviors rather than stability in self- or parent perceptions.

Interpretations and Conclusions About the Evidence from Longitudinal Studies

As we discussed in the introduction to this section, Maccoby (2002) suggested that the study of individual differences in gender typing was no longer productive on the basis of various types of evidence, most notably: ( a ) the idea that sex typing is multidimensional and lacks coherence, and ( b ) the situational variability of gender typing. In our review of the longitudinal data, we identified some reasons why prior findings might have led to Maccoby's conclusions. Most importantly, the longitudinal studies suggest that a lack of power and insufficient reliability may have made it difficult to observe temporal stability within domains or coherence across domains. The case is particularly clear for studies of sex segregation. The studies of very short-term stability suggest that children do vary from day-to-day and week-to-week in the proportion of time spent with same- versus other-sex peers. Over greater numbers of data points and amounts of time, however, relative consistency of individual children can be seen (e.g., Martin & Fabes 2001 ). This observation also speaks to the apparent lack of coherence seen across different indices of gender typing. Indeed, when stable, reliable measures are used, coherence across indices is often observed (e.g., Martin & Fabes 2001 , Serbin et al. 1993 ). In short, based on the findings reviewed, we conclude that the study of individual differences in gender typing may be more productive than has recently been thought. Nevertheless, we also urge caution: It would be unreasonable to conclude that gender typing is strong and stable throughout life, because the database is limited in a number of ways.

First, it is not clear how long such differences remain stable. For example, gender-typed behavior is perhaps most visible in young children, when rigid distinctions appear in children's appearance and play. Many if not most preschool girls show some manifestation of extreme “girliness,” refusing to wear anything but a dress, often pink and frilly, whereas boys are draped with superman capes or are holding swords and acting as superheroes ( Dunn & Hughes 2001 , Halim et al. 2009 , Maccoby 1998 , Ruble et al. 2007a ). We know almost nothing about the stability of such behaviors after preschool, however. It may be necessary to examine how one kind of gender typing at one age relates to a different kind at a later age ( McHale et al. 2004 ). Does a lack of interest in dresses predict later interest in sports or playing with boys? Future research using both longitudinal and retrospective methods may provide answers to such questions.

Second, it is not clear which forms of gender typing may be most stable and best characterize the essence of individual differences. The review of longitudinal studies focused on two frequently examined elements of gender typing (sex segregation and interests/activity preferences). Other aspects of gender development may turn out to be more fundamental, however, at least at some ages. One such candidate is a sense of oneself in relation to males and females. How important or central is gender to self-concept? How typical does one feel as a male or female? Multidimensional theories of social identity demonstrate the significance of such distinctions after the early elementary school years ( Ashmore et al. 2004 , Egan & Perry 2001 ). Moreover, perhaps stable individual differences are characterized not only by general feelings of typicality and centrality but also by the specific nature of one's fit with gender ( Tobin et al. 2009 ). For example, one preadolescent girl may recognize that she is not a typical female in the sense of having more interest than other females have in sports and less interest in room decoration or make-up, but she may feel part of girls as a group and want to look and act feminine in manner. Other children's sense of gender may emphasize avoiding gender-typical characteristics that they dislike: a girl may eschew the giggly, girly stuff; a boy may try to distance himself from macho elements of maleness.

Finally, future research might examine whether stable individual differences in certain gender-related cognitions emerge after preschool. Most children pass through a phase of believing that it is morally wrong for a boy to wear nail polish or for a girl to play football, but this typically ends by early elementary school ( Ruble et al. 2006 ). Thus, individual differences in tolerance of gender atypical behaviors may be found later. Indeed, recent research has shown quite high levels of stability (0.5–0.6) in gender role attitudes over a two-year period in 10- to 12-year-olds ( McHale et al. 2004 ). Also, a recent study provided direct support for the idea that once the period of rigidity has passed, individual differences may emerge. Stable individual differences in reactions to gender role violations were found across two time points and related to self-esteem only for children 5 years or older, past peak rigidity ( Lurye et al. 2008 ).

In short, our analysis of longitudinal research suggests that conclusions about the lack of evidence for stable individual differences in gender typing may have been limited by looking too hard and with too few data points for some unified construct. Although gender typing is clearly multidimensional, there may be stable elements in some components (e.g., behavior/interests) but not in others (e.g., attitudes/stereotypes), at least at particular ages. Perhaps, then, it would be productive to examine individual differences in gender typing as a developmentally malleable construct. Developmental factors may limit the extent to which biological predispositions can be expressed, change the way children are cognitively capable of thinking about gender, and expose them to varying social influences. Thus, the form of gender typing that is paramount may vary at different phases of life, and different combinations of biological, cognitive, and socialization processes could contribute to indi vidual differences in gender typing at different times.

HOW DOES THE STUDY OF GENDER DEVELOPMENT BENEFIT FROM DYNAMIC ANALYSES?

Gender development research has been guided by theories that offer differing explanations about the origins of gender typing and sex differences. These theories emphasize a variety of different processes, including cognitive developmental changes (e.g., Bigler & Liben 2007 , Kohlberg 1966 , Martin & Halverson 1981 ), socialization ( Bussey & Bandura 1999 , Mischel 1966 ), and proximal ( McCarthy & Arnold 2008 ) and distal biological influences (e.g., evolutionary pressures) (see Ruble et al. 2006 for a review of these theories as well as the multiple distinctions currently being made for each type of process). Despite differences, a common element among these theories is reliance on data collected at one or few time points, and in rare cases, multiple assessments are made over time and then are aggregated. Aggregation and limited assessment methods provide information about concurrent relations and long-term patterns; however, these methods sacrifice important information about variability over time, and are not focused on assessing short-term, moment-to-moment changes.

By applying methods and concepts used in the physical and biological sciences, the variation that most psychologists have considered error or background noise may be found to contain “the dynamic signature of purposive behavior” ( Van Orden et al. 2003 , p. 331). Dynamic studies of this background noise in behavior are beginning to reveal new and potentially important insights about a range of psychological and social processes, including motor development (e.g., Adolph et al. 2003 , Kelso 1995 ), emotional development ( Lewis & Granic 2000 ), dyadic play ( Steenbeek & van Geert 2008 ), structure of the self ( Nowak et al. 2000 ), cognitive development ( van Geert 2003 ), and stereotyping (e.g., Correll 2008 ). This revolutionary approach to describing and understanding patterns, based on complexity theory ( Waldrop 1992 ) or commonly labeled “dynamic systems approach” or “dynamic systems theory” ( Thelen & Smith 1998 ), has been gaining ground across fields.

Dynamic systems (DS) approaches have potential for illuminating processes involved in gender development by providing both conceptual and methodological advances that enable researchers to assess fine-grained as well as larger-grained developmental temporal variations ( Lichtwarck-Aschoff et al. 2008 ) and, especially important for developmental research, to delineate relationships between different timescales (e.g., Lewis 2002 ). A comprehensive theory of gender development needs to describe and explain long-term developmental changes but must also describe how gender is experienced and plays out in short-term interactions with objects and people. DS approaches provide conceptual underpinnings and methods for identifying patterns of behavior change over time, and in some cases, how these patterns may relate to one another.

The DS approach is appealing for a number of other reasons. Gender-related topics (e.g., work and family issues) have taken center stage in heated discussions about the roles of nature versus nurture, mainly concerning the origins and nature of sex differences. Because the DS approach advocates no distinctions between the sources of influence on a system ( Oyama 2000 ), they offer a rapprochement for debates about nature versus nurture. Furthermore, the DS approach has potential to provide a theoretical umbrella that would incorporate aspects of many gender development theories. Specifically, adopting a DS approach suggests new ways to collect, analyze, and describe data but provides limited guidance on which parameters to study; existing theories help to fill that gap.

Thus far, DS analysis of gender development has been limited to a few topics: sexual orientation (e.g., Diamond 2007 ), children's sex segregation ( Martin 2008 , Martin et al. 2005 ), and mother-infant interactions ( Fausto-Sterling et al. 2008 ). Below, we provide a description of basic concepts of DS approaches and then employ topics on gender development and review empirical studies to illustrate some of the major features of dynamic approaches (see Thelen & Smith 1994 , 1998 , 2006 ).

Dynamics and Complex Systems: Basic Concepts

Dynamic analyses are applied to complex systems, which are systems characterized by simple, interrelated interacting elements, where the interactions of these elements give rise to higher-order global patterns (e.g., Waldrop 1992 ). This process, called self-organization, does not require a higher-order agent and is not preprogrammed. Structures arise as the elements spontaneously organize and reorganize into emergent systems that are larger and more complex (e.g., Williams 1997 ). Examples of complex systems abound: heart-rate variability, army ant swarms, termite nest building, and the formation of hurricanes.

Scientists interested in applying dynamic systems must first identify and define the variable that represents the system of interest, called the collective variable ( Thelen & Smith 2006 ). The collective variable should be clearly defined and observable, and understanding how it behaves over different conditions is important. In developmental psychology, some classic examples of collective variables that have been studied include walking, reaching, and word learning.

Dynamic systems are marked by fluctuations from factors internal and external to the system, and this inherent activity provides potential for changes to occur in the system. In some cases, the system dampens down the fluctuations, allowing stability; in other cases, the system is “perturbed,” that is, it loses coherence, exhibits high degrees of variability, and may experience a qualitative change (i.e., phase shift) to a new coordinated state. As dynamic systems experience fluctuations, they have certain preferred states that occur with a high probability under certain conditions (called attractors). When displaced from these preferred states, the system tends to return there ( Thelen & Smith 2006 ). Some of these attractors are strong; others are weaker and have less “pull” on behavior. Other states act as repellors because behavior never or seldom settles there.

A goal for researchers is to understand and map both the immediate and longer-term stability/variability of complex systems. Researchers strive to identify the shifts among states because this is when the agents of change are most easily identified. These change agents (called control parameters) may be obvious (e.g., practice facilitating learning), but they also may appear incidental or minor ( Thelen & Smith 2006 ). For instance, in a classic study, King & West (1988) found that male cowbird song development was influenced by a seemingly unimportant factor—the patterning of brief wing flickering in female cowbirds. In developmental research, an aspect of language development that may appear unrelated to another domain of language development has been identified as an agent of change: Children who show a fast rate of word learning are limited in their ability to access well-known words ( Gershkoff-Stowe & Smith 1997 ). Regardless of their salience, such agents of change are more easily identified at transition points because they vary with changes in the collective variable.

Children's Play Choices: Sex Segregation as a Dynamic System

Children's tendency to assort by sex is an example of a complex system. Sex segregation is a pervasive, early-developing pattern that increases over childhood until interactions are so segregated that boys and girls have been described as growing up in separate cultures ( Maccoby & Jacklin 1987 ). A DS analysis of sex segregation may focus on the patterns that emerge over time in a child's choice of play partners and examine how these choices vary over the school year. Important variables to examine when children first begin congregating with peers (e.g., in a new class) might include social factors (e.g., each child's prior experiences with peers) as well as biological factors (e.g., hormone levels) or biosocial influences, such as the child's temperament (e.g., being inhibited). Children's choices are interdependent with others in the class: Choices are constrained by who is available to play on a given day, at a given time, and depend upon the choices made by others in the class immediately before the child decides to find a partner. Degrees of freedom for choosing a partner are lost the more other children have already claimed a partner.

Through repeated interactions and reshuffling, patterns of play may change as interactions become increasingly governed by children's experiences with classmates; their responsiveness to bids, play styles, and shared interests. Individual children may settle into particular patterns of play with particular partners. For instance, from individual children's experiences, more and longer-playing same-sex dyads may emerge in the system. As these processes play out over longer time intervals, a child's dyadic play may grow into larger groups of same-sex children, and these groupings may be formed and maintained depending upon the interests of children or the desires or openness of the initial dyad to including other children. Interestingly, simulations have demonstrated that even when individuals show only very slight preferences for similar others, segregation emerges ( Schelling 1971 , Wilensky 1997 ).

Play patterns can also be viewed from the perspective of the entire class. A series of bird'seye snapshots of a playground would show that the number of children in class who are involved in sex-segregated play varies as pairings and groupings of children form and break up, with groupings shifting over time. With more children involved in same-sex groupings, these groups may have enhanced appeal, and so other children will be drawn into the groups, thus illustrating how the higher-order structure of same-sex groups may also influence patterning of interactions. Sex segregation as an emergent structure of the system may become increasingly evident at both the individual-child and classroom levels. Although no one person directed the class or an individual child to choose same-sex partners for play, sex-segregation can emerge, suggesting a self-organizing system.

Variability in Systems: Sex Segregation, Gender-Typed Activities, and Gender Identity

Dynamic systems analyses involve studying temporal patterning—how a system transforms from one state to another over time. Scientists studying a system need to understand the short- and long-term stability and change in the system so the regular variability is distinguishable from extreme variability. Extreme variability holds particular fascination as it may signal a shift of a system from one kind of attractor to a new kind of attractor, or to a more highly organized state. For this reason, scientists using dynamic analyses may use cross-sectional data to narrow their focus to the time frames of most interest and then collect intensive data about variations in the primary variables of interest as well as about potential agents of change.

A gender application to illustrate this point would be the theoretically important issue of how gender-typed toy choices emerge. Since cross-sectional research suggests that boys begin to show gender-typed toy choices (e.g., playing with trucks) around the age of two ( Berenbaum et al. 2008 , Ruble et al. 2006 ), bracketing this time with intensive data collection about toy choices would be particularly interesting. Also, to better understand factors influencing such choices, other information about the play situation (e.g., other available toys, presence of peers), parents (e.g., stereotypic beliefs), and children (e.g., gender knowledge, activity level) should be collected. Developmental changes in any of these may influence boys' sense of control or feelings of pressure concerning toy selection. Studies of fine-grained changes from day-to-day or moment-to-moment gain import, and multiple data points are needed to detect these patterns.

When children enter preschool, qualitative changes may occur in their toy and activity choices. Preschool is a dramatically different setting from that at home; more peers of both sexes are available as play partners, and adult supervision may be low. Dynamic analyses involving longitudinal data about toy choices at home and school would shed light on this transition. Analysis of the activities children engage in at home versus at preschool, and the presence and reactions of peers, would provide insights into whether children's preferences change dynamically in preschool, where many toys are available, peers may tease them for “gender-inappropriate” play, and adults may react differently than their parents.

Fine-grained data have been collected on young children's peer choices, making this topic suitable for illustrating both stability and variability in dynamic systems. Controversy has arisen about the stability of sex segregation (see How Stable Are Individual Differences in Gender Typing section, above), but it appears that as more snapshots of behavior are aggregated, sex segregation becomes more stable until it reaches a moderately high level ( Martin & Fabes 2001 ). The stability of sex segregation may be questioned in part because of the variability in this behavior from day-to-day. To illustrate this more clearly, notice the day-to-day variation in children's play partners, based on observations conducted during the fall term for four children depicted in Figure 1 . Variability is apparent, although two children also show strong same-sex preferences day-to-day, but the other two children do not. There also is stability over time; children's patterns remain similar into the spring term of data collection. Extending this type of analysis to explore when and how variations occur would be fascinating.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-504918-f0001.jpg

Day-to-day variations in children's play partner choices as a function of sex of child and long-term patterning. Observed play partner choices were summed and averaged per day of observation using the following: Each boy play partner was given a +1; each girl was given a −1. Children with ID numbers 1032 and 1022 were girls; children with ID numbers 1041 and 1045 were boys. For girls, data below the 0 point represent same-sex peer play; for boys, data above the 0 point represent same-sex play. The graphs at the top of the page (1032 and 1041) represent patterns of children who tend to show long-term preferences for same-sex play; the graphs at the bottom of the page represent patterns of children who tend to show long-term preferences for playing with both sexes. Variability is apparent in all the graphs ( DiDonato & Martin 2009 ).

Another approach for applying dynamic analysis is to focus on the potential instability of constructs believed to be stable. Walking is a stable feature of most humans' behavior, but the exact form of walking at any given time depends on many different factors, including the type of surface being walked upon (e.g., thick rug versus tiled floor, slope of surface). Most researchers think of gender identity as being a stable feature, but if we consider when variations in gender identity might occur, it broadens the perspective on gender identity. An interesting analysis would be to explore variations in feelings (e.g., gender typicality, comfort) and displays of gender identity (e.g., style of dressing, voice, gestures) over different types of social “surfaces” (e.g., being in a sports bar, holding a baby) ( Martin 2000 ). Analysis of moment-to-moment changes in the patterning of gender identity may reveal surprising insights about gender development (a similar point is made about identity formation in Lichtwarck-Aschoff et al. 2008 ). For instance, collecting intensive time-series data about feelings of gender typicality (e.g., “How similar do you feel to your own sex right now?”) over a range of situations may illustrate that feelings of gender typicality are strong and show little variability in situations where one is a minority member, but that gender typicality is low but more variable when one is in a same-sex situation.

Dynamic Contexts: Gender Cognitions and Socialization

An important feature of dynamic analysis is how “context” is viewed. Although context is considered important in gender theories, it is often conceptualized as being distal (i.e., cultural contexts). In contrast, DS theorists view context as a dynamic characteristic of interactions, one that is temporally and spatially close and is an aspect of the interaction process itself ( Steenbeek & van Geert 2008 ). Even influences typically considered distal, stable, or abstract are represented and carried forward in time by their embodiment within everyday interactions. For instance, gender stereotypes and gender identity become embodied as children dynamically engage in “gendering”—remembering gender and acting on gender—incorporating the immediate contextual factors, and this being carried forward to the next moment of knowing and acting on gender.

Developmental processes that occur in real time then carry over and become consolidated and generalized across different contexts ( Fischer & Bidell 1998 ), and these then influence and constrain behavior (e.g., Lewis 2000 ) (although there is controversy about the extent to which this happens) (for review of the issue, see Witherington 2007 ). For instance, as toddlers come to understand their sex, become motivated by same-sex expectations, and begin to develop stereotypes, these features can be carried into interactions with others. The patterning and display of the gendered self may evolve into new forms (e.g., styles of dress, play partners, activities), which vary from moment-to-moment and over longer time periods. Thinking of gender as being enacted in each interaction is similar to proposals from sociological research traditions focusing on the social construction of gender ( West & Zimmerman 1991 ).

Gender socialization provides a good example of how both the child's and parents' cognitions are enacted in moment-to-moment interactions through the dynamic embodiment of gender. Parental expectations about what it means to have a child who is either a boy or girl (expectations colored by cultural values, etc.) become displayed as actions with the child (e.g., glances, touching, toy offering), and these embodied expectations interact with the child's phenotypic and early behavioral features. Thus, gender socialization involves parents and siblings, peers, other socialization agents, and the individual child, who all act and interact in varied contexts.

Methods and Analyses of Dynamic Systems

Studying complex systems involves identifying the collective variables that capture the behavior of interest and then collecting a long time series of data to watch the emergence of behaviors. Social scientists may avoid dynamic analyses because they expect that they will have to collect thousands of observations to identify complex patterns of behavior. However, even shorter time frames and smaller sets of time-series data may reveal important features that traditional methods may not disclose ( Williams 1997 ), especially when investigators use some of the newly proposed analytic techniques (e.g., Finan et al. 2008).

The recognition and study of complex systems have promoted development of an array of techniques designed to understand these systems, including techniques for nonlinear dynamics, time-series analyses, data visualization (e.g., Lamey et al. 2004 ), and computer simulations to model the behavior of systems (e.g., Griffin et al. 2004 , Schafer et al. 2009 ). This new and expanded toolbox provides better ways of describing, analyzing, and interpreting temporal data of all types ( Ward 2002 ). The mathematics involved in describing systems can be complex and unfamiliar to psychologists (e.g., May 1976 ); thus, DS ideas often are applied heuristically for thinking about patterns and for directing the kinds of data that are obtained rather than using the toolkit of analyses that describe obtained time-series data. However, psychologists have become increasingly interested in developing and applying these analytic tools (see Boker & Wenger 2007 , van Geert 2003 ). For instance, Thelen and colleagues (2001) conducted rigorous modeling of a developmental phenomenon involving touching patterns of infants (the A-not-B effect), which was originally identified by Piaget. Others are refining and expanding upon DS approaches to better integrate these ideas with connectionist models (e.g., Spencer & Schoner 2003 ) and neurobiology ( Lewis 2005 ). Regardless of how it is employed, DS perspectives hold promise for revealing patterns of gender development previously unrecognized.

Dynamic Analyses of Gendered Play Partners and Activities

Not all the applications of DS to gender development are as abstract as we have presented above. In this section, we outline specific examples of studies that have been conducted to apply a dynamic systems approach to gender development.

Data visualization, attractors, and repellors in children's sex segregation

In a dynamic view of sex segregation, children are seen to settle into certain behavioral patterns. This illustrates a characteristic of a dynamic system: Despite a large number of possible patterns among system elements, only a few ever stabilize. Dynamic analyses have been used to study the patterns of children's play partners in preschool classes and the role of gender in these interactions. Martin and colleagues (2005) used a new data-visualization tool, called state space grids (SSGs), to explore the extent to which preschool children showed attraction for same-sex and behaviorally similar children. Developmental scientists interested in applying DS methods (e.g., Granic & Lamey 2002 , Hollenstein et al. 2004 ) recognized the need for a methodology to visualize system dynamics; thus, they developed the SSG technique (e.g., Lewis et al. 1999 ).

SSGs involve mapping of dimensions onto a state space to determine the regularity or stability of the patterns (for a description of how to use GridWare, see Hollenstein 2007 ). In Martin et al. (2005) , SSGs were constructed based on children's choices of play partners derived from scan observations of three classes of preschool children over several months in order to examine whether sex of peers and behavioral tendencies act as attractors. Children were divided into types using cluster analysis: externalizing, internalizing, and socially competent children; play patterns of target children with types of peers (rather than one other child) were analyzed using SSGs. If children's play partner choices related strongly to behavioral similarity, then competent children should choose other competent children regardless of sex; if their selections relate to sex, then children should choose on the basis of similar sex regardless of behavior.

Attractors were characterized in three ways. First, a high number of individual interactions in the state space regions representing play with same-sex peers or particular peer qualities (e.g., externalizing) would indicate that those spaces are attractors. If same-sex peers act as attractors, then we would expect, for instance, that girls would have more interactions in the “girl peer” region than in the “boy peer” region. Second, when a region is an attractor, children should enter it quickly; for instance, early in the time series, girls would be expected to play with girls and would have few (or no) interactions with boys before they move into the “girl peer” region. Third, if a region is an attractor, children should return to the region quickly. Whenever girls leave the “girl peer” region, they would be expected to have relatively few interactions with boys before moving back to playing with girls.

The results supported these ideas. Same-sex peers were strong attractors for children: Both sexes had more than twice as many interactions with same-sex than with other-sex peers, were faster to return to same-sex peers, and started playing with them more quickly. Interestingly, these patterns were apparent even in the first 20 observations obtained on children after only several weeks of preschool. Figure 2 illustrates a typical pattern for a girl's first 20 interactions. The SSG shows data from a competent girl, whose first coded play bout is with a girl (open circle), and the pattern shows that she plays with girls more than with boys. Externalizing and social competence also contributed to behavioral states, but patterns varied by sex of child and peer (e.g., boys were more attracted to externalizing boys than to externalizing girls). As Figure 2 illustrates, the competent girl played much more with competent girls than with other girls, but she did not play with competent boys at all. Overall, the findings suggest that both the sex of peers and their behavioral qualities help fashion the social organization in the classroom.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-504918-f0002.jpg

A socially competent girl's state space grid, illustrating her patterns of play with peers of different sexes and different behavioral qualities over the first 20 observed interactions. The x -axis represents the sex of the peer with whom the target girl interacts; the y -axis represents the behavioral quality of the peers as determined by clustering teacher ratings of children's behavior. Each solid circle represents a single observed interaction, and the open circle represents the first observed interaction (with a socially competent girl). Lines between circles represent the ordering of observations. This girl showed strong sex selection: 16 of her first 20 interactions were with girls. She also showed a preference for interacting with socially competent girls but not boys ( Martin 2008 ).

In a similar study, Martin (2008) compared patterns of children who were highly gender typed in play to those with less gender-typed play patterns in order to examine whether children who differed in their overall patterns showed differences early in the time series of observations. Interestingly, within the first 20 observed interactions, highly gender-typed children experienced more positive emotions with same-sex than with other-sex peers; less gender-typed children showed no difference. These findings suggest that children who have early positive emotional experiences with same-sex peers but not with other-sex peers incorporate these experiences into their play, such that same-sex peers have increasing appeal, whereas other-sex peers lose their appeal. In this way, emotional experiences with peers appear to contribute to the overall patterning of children's play and to sex segregation in the class.

These studies use data-visualization techniques to illustrate a new approach to examining peer interaction patterns and suggest that both the sex of peers and peers' behavior act as attractors. Additional research involving moment-to-moment coding of behavior and new techniques for analyzing group patterns will allow for an even more detailed dynamic analyses of children's behavior with peers.

Self-organized criticality in the temporal patterning of children's gendered behavior

Many complex systems show a particularly intriguing pattern of organization, called self-organization near a critical state. These systems are balanced between enough stability to maintain order and enough instability or variation to be adaptive to change ( Bak et al. 1989 ). Adaptability is enhanced because new alternatives can be generated as needed in response to varying circumstances (e.g., Van Orden et al. 2003 ). In physiological systems, self-organized criticality is associated with well-being and health, and its loss or deterioration is related to disease, depression, and aging ( Goldberger 1996 , Linkenkaer-Hansen et al. 2005 , Sosnoff & Newell 2008 ).

Self-organization near a critical state involves “self-similarity” across time-scales; in other words, if one small portion of the time series is magnified, its appearance is similar to the larger time series in which it is embedded. That is, small-scale patterns reflect the patterns that would be expected at larger scales, such that identifying a regularity in a 2-minute window of time may share similarity to a pattern found in a 16-minute window, and both may share similarity to a pattern found on a much longer timescale (e.g., developmental changes that occur from early to later childhood). This self-organization near a critical state is represented by the presence of long-term, positively correlated variability in a time series ( Treffner & Kelso 1999 , Van Orden et al. 2003 ). Time series with completely independent data do not exhibit self-similarity. Given the implications for understanding different timescales and how they relate to one another, the implications of finding self-similarity in systems are far-ranging, especially for developmental scientists.

DiDonato (2008) applied both dynamic and traditional analyses to explore whether children's gendered behavior shows self-organized criticality and whether temporal patterns relate to children's adjustment. Brief observations of preschool children's activities and play partners were conducted daily over several months. By combining gender typing of activities and play partners across observations each day, DiDonato derived a single indicator of gendered behavior. Each child's time series was plotted and analyzed for self-organized criticality (e.g., Hurst 1951 ), and the results indicated this pattern, suggesting that children exhibited flexibility in their gendered behavior. For example, the implication of the findings is that a girl who normally plays with girls may adapt her behavior by playing with a boy if he is playing with her favorite toy. Furthermore, flexibility in gendered behavior was positively related to adjustment in girls but not in boys. Boys' restricted gender roles may constrain the relation between flexible behavior and adjustment.

These findings have implications for debates about how gender roles relate to adjustment and provide a compelling example of how both traditional and dynamic approaches can be combined to yield more information than would either approach alone. In this case, the short-term patterning of activities and partners related to adjustment, and it suggests that further explorations of changes in children's gendered behavior at different timescales are warranted.

In sum, DS approaches have potential for providing a new lens for viewing gender development. DS approaches adopt unique views of context, focus on describing variability, provide information about patterning of behavior over both short and longer developmental time frames, and suggest new techniques and different methods of data analyses and collection. Adopting a DS approach also has the potential to provide an all-encompassing theoretical umbrella and deflates controversy surrounding the roles of nature and nurture in gender development. At a broader level, DS approaches crosscut disciplinary boundaries, bridging methods and concepts across disciplines. Highlights of the appeal of exploring DS approaches include discovering new answers to old problems, recognizing new types of questions, and ultimately advancing alternative accounts of gender development.

CONCLUSIONS

Children's gender development unfolds over long time frames of average or normative change, over shorter time frames such as the emergence of relatively stable individual preferences in with whom or with what to play during the early school years, and over much shorter time frames—micro timescales—such as when an individual child selects an outfit to wear or carries on an interaction with a peer over a toy. In the present review, we illustrated each of these time frames in terms of a few specific current, and sometimes controversial, topics in the field of gender development.

First, we took the long view, examining normative changes from infancy through middle adolescence in key aspects of children's beliefs and behaviors regarding gender distinctions. In this way, we were able to speak to the question of temporal ordering of different elements of gender development and, thereby, analyze certain controversies within the field about how early children understand gender distinctions and how that understanding relates to behavior. Moreover, the analysis of temporal ordering helps generate hypotheses for future research about what indications of gender prejudice, such as ingroup favoritism, might represent for young children who can understand gender stereotypes but not necessarily status inequities between the sexes.

Normative trends involve only averages across individuals; they do not, however, inform us about whether there are stable individual differences in expressions of gender typing. Whether there are continuities in individual gender typing over time has been another important but controversial topic in gender development. For instance, identifying stability in sex segregation would suggest that individual children vary in their preferences and that sex segregation is not simply due to situational variability or normative constraints as had previously been assumed. Thus, in the second section, we reviewed studies of longitudinal change within individuals over shorter periods of time. We discovered that there is more stability in sex segregation and gender-typed activities and preferences than previously thought. However, future research must determine how long stability exists and over which periods of development.

Another advantage of normative trends is that they indicate at what points developmentally it would be useful to search for stable individual differences, such as after periods of rapid change, as when children first enter preschool. In the third section, we described a new tool for taking advantage of such opportunities. Dynamic systems theory provides a coherent set of principles and methods for examining change over differing time frames. Socialization, cognitive, and biological processes can be explored over multiple time frames using techniques that focus on temporal patterning of behavior. Dynamic systems theory complements existing theories by providing more nuanced views of gender at different timescales. For instance, sex segregation exhibits both variability and stability from a dynamic perspective. Particularly intriguing is the potential for small-scale patterns to provide insights into large-scale patterns. For systems that exhibit self-similarity, a pattern that appears at a microlevel time frame mimics the pattern found at a more macrolevel time frame. Considering similarity across timescales is an idea that, in our view, has no counterpart in developmental research or theorizing.

Developmental research on gender has primarily focused attention on the longer timescales to assess normative developmental patterning. Less attention has been focused on shorter timescales to explore individual patterns and stability of behavior, and very little has been done to explore gender development in terms of micro timescales. We hope our review has made it clear that comprehensive explanations of gender need to consider each of these timescale perspectives.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This review was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1 R01 HD45816) and a grant from the T. Denny Sanford Foundation awarded to Carol Lynn Martin; a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Research Grant (1 R01 HD04994) to Diane N. Ruble; and a National Science Foundation IRADS grant (0721383). We are very grateful to Faith Greulich for assistance in preparing the manuscript and to Nia Amazeen, Matt DiDonato, May Ling Halim, Tom Hollenstein, and Kristina Zosuls for comments on an earlier draft.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The authors are not aware of any biases that might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.

LITERATURE CITED

Adolph KE, Vereijken B, Shrout PE. What changes in infant walking and why. Child Dev. 2003; 74 :475–97. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Alexander GM, Hines M. Gender labels and play styles: their relative contribution to children's selection of playmates. Child Dev. 1994; 65 :869–79. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Arthur AE, Bigler RS, Liben LS, Gelman SA, Ruble DN. Gender stereotyping and prejudice: a developmental intergroup perspective. In: Levy S, Killen M, editors. Intergroup Attitudes and Relations in Childhood Through Adulthood. Oxford Univ. Press; New York: 2008. pp. 66–85. [ Google Scholar ]
Ashmore RD, Deaux K, McLaughlin-Volpe T. An organizing framework for collective identity: articulation and significance of multidimensionality. Psychol. Bull. 2004; 130 :80–114. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bak P, Chen K, Creutz M. Self-organized criticality in the “Game of Life.” Nature. 1989; 342 :780–81. [ Google Scholar ]
Baldwin DA, Moses LK. The ontogeny of social information gathering. Child Dev. 1996; 67 :1915–39. [ Google Scholar ]
Bandura A, Bussey K. On broadening the cognitive, motivational, and sociocultural scope of theorizing about gender development and functioning: comment on Martin, Ruble, and Szkrybalo (2002) Psychol. Bull. 2004; 130 :691–701. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bartini M. Gender role flexibility in early adolescence: developmental change in attitudes, self-perceptions, and behaviors. Sex Roles. 2006; 55 :233–45. [ Google Scholar ]
Bauer PJ, Liebl M, Stennes L. Pretty is to dress as brave is to suitcoat: gender-based property-to-property inferences by 4–1/2-year-old children. Merrill-Palmer Q. 1998; 44 :355–77. [ Google Scholar ]
Berenbaum SA, Martin CL, Hanish LD, Briggs PT, Fabes RA. Sex differences in children's play. In: Becker JB, Berkley KJ, Geary N, Hampson E, Herman JP, Young EA, editors. Sex Differences in the Brain: From Genes to Behavior. Oxford Univ. Press; Oxford, UK: 2008. pp. 275–90. [ Google Scholar ]
Berndt TJ, Heller KA. Gender stereotypes and social inferences: a developmental study. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1986; 50 :889–98. [ Google Scholar ]
Bigler RS, Arthur AE, Hughes JM. The politics of race and gender: children's perceptions of discrimination and the U.S. presidency. Anal. Soc. Issues Public Policy. 2008; 8 :1–30. [ Google Scholar ]
Bigler RS, Jones LC, Lobliner DB. Social categorization and the formation of intergroup attitudes in children. Child Dev. 1997; 68 :530–43. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bigler RS, Liben LS. Developmental intergroup theory: explaining and reducing children's social stereotyping and prejudice. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2007; 16 :162–66. [ Google Scholar ]
Boker SM, Wenger MJ. Data Analytic Techniques for Dynamical Systems. Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
Brewer MB. Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In: Ashmore RD, Jussim L, Wilder D, editors. Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction. Oxford Univ. Press; New York: 2001. pp. 17–41. [ Google Scholar ]
Brown CS, Bigler RS. Children's perceptions of discrimination: a developmental model. Child Dev. 2005; 76 :533–53. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bussey K, Bandura A. Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychol. Rev. 1999; 106 :676–713. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cameron JA, Alvarez JM, Ruble DN, Fuligni AJ. Children's lay theories about ingroups and outgroups: reconceptualizing research on “prejudice.” Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2001; 5 :118–28. [ Google Scholar ]
Campbell A, Shirley L, Caygill L. Sex-typed preferences in three domains: Do two-year-olds need cognitive variables? Br. J. Psychol. 2002; 93 :203–17. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Connor JM, Serbin LA. Behaviorally-based masculine and feminine activity preference scales for preschoolers: correlates with other classroom behaviors and cognitive tests. Child Dev. 1977; 48 :1411–16. [ Google Scholar ]
Correll J. 1/ f noise and effort on implicit measures of bias. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2008; 94 :48–59. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Deaux K, Lewis LL. Structure of gender stereotypes: inter-relationships among components and gender label. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1984; 46 :991–1004. [ Google Scholar ]
Diamond L. A dynamic systems approach to the development and expression of female same-sex sexuality. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2007; 2 :142–61. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
DiDonato MD. Thesis. Arizona State Univ.; Tempe: 2008. Children's gendered behavior and psychological adjustment: longitudinal and dynamic relations. [ Google Scholar ]
DiDonato MD, Martin CL. Variations in children's play patterns day to day. Tempe, AZ: 2009. Manuscript in preparation. [ Google Scholar ]
Dunn J, Hughes C. “I got some swords and you're dead!”: violent fantasy, antisocial behavior, friendship, and moral sensibility in young children. Child Dev. 2001; 72 :491–505. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Edelbrock C, Sugawara AI. Acquisition of sex-typed preferences in preschool children. Dev. Psychol. 1978; 14 :614–23. [ Google Scholar ]
Egan SK, Perry DG. Gender identity: a multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Dev. Psychol. 2001; 37 :451–63. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Epstein S. The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research. Am. Psychol. 1980; 35 :790–806. [ Google Scholar ]
Fagan JF, Singer LT. The role of simple feature differences in infants' recognition of faces. Infant Behav. Dev. 1979; 2 :39–45. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fausto-Sterling A, Coll CG, Schooler D. Towards a dynamic study of gender in infant development. Presented at Gender Dev. Conf.; San Francisco. 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
Finan PH, Hessler EE, Amazeen PG, Butner J, Zautra AJ, Tennen H. Nonlinear oscillations in pain prediction accuracy. Nonlinear Dynamics Psychol. Life Sci. 2009 In press. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fischer KW, Bidell TR. Dynamic development of psychological structures in action and thought. In: Lerner RM, editor. Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical Models of Human Development. Wiley; New York: 1998. pp. 313–99. [ Google Scholar ]
Gershkoff-Stowe L, Smith LB. A curvilinear trend in naming errors as a function of early vocabulary growth. Cogn. Psychol. 1997; 34 :37–71. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Giles JW, Heyman GD. Young children's beliefs about the relationship between gender and aggressive behavior. Child Dev. 2005; 76 :107–21. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Glick P, Fiske ST. Ambivalent sexism. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Academic; Thousand Oaks, CA: 2001. pp. 115–88. [ Google Scholar ]
Goldberger AL. Non-linear dynamics for clinicians: chaos theory, fractals, and complexity at the bedside. Lancet. 1996; 347 :1312–14. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Golombok S, Rust J. The Pre-school Activities Inventory: a standardized assessment of gender role in children. Psychol. Assess. 1993; 5 :131–36. [ Google Scholar ]
Golombok S, Rust J, Zervoulis K, Croudace T, Golding J, Hines M. Developmental trajectories of sex-typed behavior in boys and girls: a longitudinal general population study of children aged 2.5–8 years. Child Dev. 2008; 79 :1583–93. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Granic I, Lamey AV. Combining dynamic-systems and multivariate analyses to compare the mother-child interactions of externalizing subtypes. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2002; 30 :265–83. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Griffin WA, Hanish LD, Martin CL, Fabes RA, Barcelo H, Greenwood P. PlayMate: new data, new rules, and model validity. In: Sallach DL, Macal CM, North MJ, editors. Agent 2004: Social Dynamics: Interaction, Reflexivity and Emergence. Univ. Chicago & Argonne Natl. Lab.; 2004. pp. 339–51. [ Google Scholar ]
Halim ML, Ruble DN. Gender identity and stereotyping in early and middle childhood. In: Chrisler JC, McCreary DR, editors. Handbook of Gender Research in Psychology. Springer-Verlag; New York: 2009. In press. [ Google Scholar ]
Halim ML, Ruble DN, Greulich F, Lurye LE, Zosuls KM. Pink frilly dresses: early obsessions and social identity. 2009. Manuscript submitted. [ Google Scholar ]
Heyman GD. Children's interpretation of ambiguous behavior: evidence for a “boys are bad” bias. Soc. Dev. 2001; 10 :230–47. [ Google Scholar ]
Hollenstein T. State space grids: analyzing dynamics across development. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 2007; 31 :384–96. [ Google Scholar ]
Hollenstein T, Granic I, Stoolmiller M, Snyder J. Rigidity in parent-child interactions and the development of externalizing and internalizing behavior in early childhood. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2004; 32 :598–602. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hurst HE. Long term storage capacity of reservoirs. Trans. Am. Soc. Civil Eng. 1951; 116 :770–99. [ Google Scholar ]
Huston AC. Sex typing. In: Hetherington EM, editor. Handbook of Child Psychology: Socialization, Personality, and Social Development. Wiley; New York: 1983. pp. 387–467. [ Google Scholar ]
Kelso JAS. Dynamic Patterns: The Self Organization of Brain and Behavior. MIT Press; Cambridge, MA: 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
Killen M, McGlothlin H, Henning A. Implicit biases and explicit judgments: a developmental perspective. In: Levy SR, Killen M, editors. Intergroup Attitudes and Relations in Childhood Through Adulthood. Oxford Univ. Press; Oxford, UK: 2008. pp. 126–45. [ Google Scholar ]
Killen M, Stangor C. Children's social reasoning about inclusion and exclusion in gender and race peer group contexts. Child Dev. 2001; 72 :174–86. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
King A, West M. Searching for the functional origins of cowbird song in eastern brown-headed cowbirds ( Molothrus ate rater ) Anim. Behav. 1988; 36 :1575–88. [ Google Scholar ]
Kohlberg LA. A cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex role concepts and attitudes. In: Maccoby EE, editor. The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford Univ. Press; Stanford, CA: 1966. pp. 82–173. [ Google Scholar ]
Kowalski K. The development of social identity and intergroup attitudes in young children. In: Saracho ON, Spodek B, editors. Contemporary Perspectives on Social Learning in Early Childhood Education. Inform. Age Publ.; Charlotte, NC: 2007. pp. 51–84. [ Google Scholar ]
Kuhn D, Nash SC, Brucken L. Sex role concepts of two- and three-year-olds. Child Dev. 1978; 49 :445–51. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
La Freniere P, Strayer FF, Gauthier R. The emergence of same-sex affiliative preferences among preschool peers: a developmental/ethological perspective. Child Dev. 1984; 55 :1958–65. [ Google Scholar ]
Lamey AV, Hollenstein T, Lewis MD, Granic I. GridWare (version 1.1B) 2004 http://statespacegrids.org . GridWare (Version 1.1). http://statespacegrids.org.Freeware available at http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/ssg/gridware.php
Langlois JH, Downs AC. Mothers, fathers, and peers as socialization agents of sex-typed play behaviors in young children. Child Dev. 1980; 51 :1237–47. [ Google Scholar ]
Leinbach MD, Hort BE, Fagot BI. Bears are for boys: metaphorical associations in young children's gender stereotypes. Cogn. Dev. 1997; 12 :107–30. [ Google Scholar ]
Levy GD. Gender-typed and non-gender-typed category awareness in toddlers. Sex Roles. 1999; 41 :851–73. [ Google Scholar ]
Levy GD, Haaf RA. Detection of gender-related categories by 10-month-old infants. Infant Behav. Dev. 1994; 17 :457–59. [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis MD. The promise of dynamic systems approaches for an integrated account of human development. Child Dev. 2000; 71 :36–43. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis MD. Interacting time scales in personality (and cognitive) development: intentions, emotions, and emergent forms. In: Granott N, Parziale J, editors. Microdevelopment: Transition Processes in Development and Learning. Cambridge Univ. Press; New York: 2002. pp. 183–212. [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis MD. Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modeling. Behav. Brain Sci. 2005; 28 :105–30. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis MD, Granic I. Emotion, Development, and Self-Organization: Dynamic Systems Approaches to Emotional Development. Cambridge Univ. Press; Cambridge, UK: 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
Lewis MD, Lamey AV, Douglas L. A new dynamic systems method for the analysis of early socioemotional development. Dev. Sci. 1999; 2 :457–75. [ Google Scholar ]
Liben LS, Bigler RS. The developmental course of gender differentiation. In: Overton W, editor. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. Blackwell Sci.; Cambridge, MA: 2002. pp. vii–147. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Liben LS, Bigler RS, Krogh HR. Pink and blue collar jobs: children's judgments of job status and job aspirations in relation to sex of worker. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2001; 79 :346–63. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lichtwarck-Aschoff A, van Geert P, Bosma H, Kunnen S. Time and identity: a framework for research and identity formation. Dev. Rev. 2008; 28 :370–400. [ Google Scholar ]
Linkenkaer-Hansen K, Monto S, Rytsala H, Suominen K, Isometsa E, Kahkonen S. Breakdown of long-range temporal correlations in theta oscillations in patients with major depressive disorder. J. Neurosci. 2005; 25 :10131–37. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lloyd B, Duveen G. Gender Identities and Education: The Impact of Starting School. St. Martin's Press; New York: 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
Lurye LE, Zosuls KM, Ruble DN. Gender identity and adjustment: understanding the impact of individual and normative differences in sex typing. New Dir. Child Adolesc. Dev. 2008; 120 :31–46. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lutz SE, Ruble DN. Children and gender prejudice: context, motivation, and the development of gender conceptions. In: Vasta R, editor. Annals of Child Development. Jessica Kingsley Publ.; London: 1995. pp. 131–66. [ Google Scholar ]
Maccoby EE. The Two Sexes: Growing Up Apart, Coming Together. Belknap; Cambridge, MA: 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
Maccoby EE. Gender and group process: a developmental perspective. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2002; 11 :54–58. [ Google Scholar ]
Maccoby EE, Jacklin CN. Gender segregation in childhood. In: Hayne WR, editor. Advances in Child Development and Behavior. Vol. 20. Academic; Orlando, FL: 1987. pp. 239–87. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL. Cognitive theories of gender development. In: Eckes T, Trautner HM, editors. The Developmental Social Psychology of Gender. Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 2000. pp. 91–121. [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL. Moving beyond the dyad: dynamic systems, gender, and social relationships in young children. Presented at Gender Dev. Conf.; San Francisco, CA. 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Fabes RA. The stability and consequences of young children's same-sex peer interactions. Dev. Psychol. 2001; 37 :431–46. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Fabes RA, Hanish LD, Hollenstein T. Social dynamics in the preschool. Dev. Rev. 2005; 25 :299–327. [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Halverson C. A schematic processing model of sex typing and stereotyping in children. Child Dev. 1981; 52 :1119–34. [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Ruble DN. Children's search for gender cues: cognitive perspectives on gender development. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2004; 13 :67–70. [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Ruble DN, Szkrybalo J. Cognitive theories of early gender development. Psychol. Bull. 2002; 128 :903–33. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Ruble DN, Szkrybalo J. Recognizing the centrality of gender identity and stereotype knowledge in gender development and moving toward theoretical integration: reply to Bandura and Bussey (2004) Psychol. Bull. 2004; 130 :702–10. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Martin CL, Wood CH, Little JK. The development of gender stereotype components. Child Dev. 1990; 61 :1891–904. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
May RM. Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics. Nature. 1976; 261 :64–72. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
McCarthy MM, Arnold AP. Sex differences in the brain: What's old and what's new? In: Becker JB, Berkley KJ, Geary N, Hampson E, Herman JP, Young EA, editors. Sex Differences in the Brain: From Genes to Behavior. Oxford Univ. Press; Oxford, UK: 2008. pp. 15–33. [ Google Scholar ]
McGuire J, Martin CL, Fabes RA, Hanish LD. The role of “gender enforcers” in young children's peer interactions. Poster presented at Biennial Mtg. Soc. Res. Child Dev.; Boston, MA. 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
McHale SM, Kim J, Whiteman S, Crouter AC. Links between sex-typed time use in middle-childhood and gender development in early adolescence. Dev. Psychol. 2004; 40 :868–81. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Miller C, Lurye LE, Zosuls KM, Ruble DN. Accessibility of gender stereotype domains: developmental and gender differences in children. Sex Roles. 2009; 60 :870–81. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Miller CL. Developmental changes in male/female voice classification by infants. Infant Behav. Dev. 1983; 6 :313–30. [ Google Scholar ]
Mischel W. A social learning view of sex differences in behavior. In: Maccoby E, editor. The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford Univ. Press; Stanford, CA: 1966. pp. 57–81. [ Google Scholar ]
Neff KD, Cooper CE, Woodruff AL. Children's and adolescents' developing perceptions of gender inequality. Soc. Dev. 2007; 16 :682–99. [ Google Scholar ]
Nowak A, Vallacher RR, Tesser A, Borkowski W. Society of the self: the emergence of collective properties in self-structure. Psychol. Rev. 2000; 107 :39–61. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Oyama S. Evolution's Eye: A Systems View of the Biology-Culture Divide. Duke Univ. Press; Durham, NC: 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
Poulin-Dubois D, Serbin LA, Derbyshire A. Toddlers' intermodal and verbal knowledge about gender. Merrill-Palmer Q. 1998; 44 :338–54. [ Google Scholar ]
Powlishta KK, Serbin LA, Doyle A, White DR. Gender, ethnic, and body type biases: the generality of prejudice in childhood. Dev. Psychol. 1994; 30 :526–36. [ Google Scholar ]
Powlishta KK, Serbin LA, Moller LC. The stability of individual differences in gender typing: implications for understanding gender segregation. Sex Roles. 1993; 29 :723–37. [ Google Scholar ]
Quinn PC, Yahr J, Kuhn A, Slater AM, Pascalis O. Representation of the gender of human faces by infants: a preference for female. Perception. 2002; 31 :1109–21. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ruble DN, Alvarez J, Bachman M, Cameron J, Fuligni A, et al. The development of a sense of self: the development and implications of children's collective identity. In: Bennett M, Sani F, editors. The Development of the Social Self. Psychol. Press; East Sussex, UK: 2004. pp. 29–76. [ Google Scholar ]
Ruble DN, Dweck CS. Self-perceptions, person conceptions, and their development. In: Eisenberg N, editor. Social Development. Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Ch. 15. Sage; Thousand Oaks, CA: 1995. pp. 109–39. [ Google Scholar ]
Ruble DN, Lurye LE, Zosuls KM. Pink frilly dresses (PFD) and early gender identity. Princeton Report Knowledge (P-ROK) 2007a; 2 :2. [ Google Scholar ]
Ruble DN, Martin CL, Berenbaum SA. Gender development. In: Eisenberg N, editor. Handbook of Child Development. Wiley; New York: 2006. pp. 858–932. [ Google Scholar ]
Ruble DN, Taylor LJ, Cyphers L, Greulich FK, Lurye LE, Shrout PE. The role of gender constancy in early gender development. Child Dev. 2007b; 78 :1121–36. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rudman LA, Glick P. The Social Psychology of Gender: How Power and Intimacy Shape Gender Relations. Guilford; New York: 2008. p. 386. [ Google Scholar ]
Schafer DR, Light JM, Fabes RA, Hanish LD, Martin CL. Fundamental principles of network formation among preschool children. Soc. Networks. 2009 In press. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Schelling TC. Dynamic models of segregation. J. Math. Sociol. 1971; 1 :143–86. [ Google Scholar ]
Serbin LS, Powlishta KK, Gulko J. The development of sex typing in middle childhood. In: Bronson WC, editor. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. Univ. Chicago Press; Chicago, IL: 1993. pp. v–74. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Signorella ML, Bigler RS, Liben LS. Developmental differences in children's gender schemata about others: a meta-analytic review. Dev. Rev. 1993; 13 :147–83. [ Google Scholar ]
Sinno SM, Killen M. Moms at work and dads at home: children's evaluations of parental roles. Appl. Dev. Sci. 2009; 13 :16–29. [ Google Scholar ]
Sosnoff JJ, Newell KM. Age-related loss of adaptability to fast time scales in motor variability. J. Gerontol. Ser. B: Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2008; 63 :344–52. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Spencer JP, Schoner G. Bridging the representational gap in the dynamic systems approach to development. Dev. Sci. 2003; 6 :392–412. [ Google Scholar ]
Sroufe LA, Bennett C, Englund M, Urban J, Shulman S. The significance of gender boundaries in preadolescence: contemporary correlates and antecedents of boundary violation and maintenance. Child Dev. 1993; 64 :455–66. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Steenbeek H, van Geert P. An empirical validation of a dynamic systems model of interaction: Do children of different sociometric statuses differ in their dyadic play? Dev. Sci. 2008; 11 :253–81. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stennes LM, Burch MM, Sen MG, Bauer PJ. A longitudinal study of gendered vocabulary and communicative action in young children. Dev. Psychol. 2005; 41 :75–88. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Susskind JE, Hodges C. Decoupling children's gender-based in-group positivity from out-group negativity. Sex Roles. 2007; 56 :707–16. [ Google Scholar ]
Teig S, Susskind JE. Truck driver or nurse? The impact of gender roles and occupational status on children's occupational preferences. Sex Roles. 2008; 58 :848–63. [ Google Scholar ]
Theimer CE, Killen M, Stangor C. Young children's evaluations of exclusion in gender-stereotypic peer contexts. Dev. Psychol. 2001; 37 :18–27. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Thelen E, Schoner G, Scheier C, Smith LB. The dynamics of embodiment: a field theory of infant perseverative reaching. Behav. Brain Sci. 2001; 24 :1–34. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Thelen E, Smith LA. A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action. Bradford/MIT Press; Cambridge, MA: 1994. [ Google Scholar ]
Thelen E, Smith LB. Dynamic systems theories. In: Damon W, editor. Handbook of Child Psychology. Wiley; New York: 1998. pp. 563–634. [ Google Scholar ]
Thelen E, Smith LB. Dynamic systems theories. In: Lerner RM, editor. Handbook of Child Psychology: Theoretical Models of Human Development. Wiley; New York: 2006. pp. 258–312. [ Google Scholar ]
Thorne B. Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. Rutgers Univ. Press; New Brunswick, NJ: 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
Tobin DD, Menon M, Menon M, Spatta BC, Hodges EVE, Perry DG. The intrapsychics of gender: a model of self-socialization. Psychol. Rev. 2009 In press. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Trautner HM, Ruble DN, Cyphers L, Kirsten B, Behrendt R, Hartman P. Rigidity and flexibility of gender stereotypes in children: developmental or differential? Infant Child Dev. 2005; 14 :365–80. [ Google Scholar ]
Treffner PJ, Kelso JAS. Dynamic encounters: long memory during functional stabilization. Ecol. Psychol. 1999; 11 :103–37. [ Google Scholar ]
Turner P, Gervai J, Hinde RA. Gender-typing in young children: preferences, behaviour, and cultural differences. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 1993; 11 :323–42. [ Google Scholar ]
van Geert P. Dynamic systems approaches and modeling of developmental processes. In: Valsiner J, Connolly KJ, editors. Handbook of Developmental Psychology. Sage; London: 2003. pp. 640–72. [ Google Scholar ]
Van Orden GC, Holden JG, Turvey MT. Self-organization of cognitive performance. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 2003; 132 :331–50. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Verkuyten M, Thijs J. Ethnic and gender bias among Dutch and Turkish children in late childhood: the role of social context. Infant Child Dev. 2001; 10 :203–17. [ Google Scholar ]
Waldrop MM. Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. Simon & Schuster; New York: 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
Ward LM. Dynamic Cognitive Science. Bradford; Cambridge, MA: 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
Weinraub M, Clemens LP, Sockloff A, Etheridge R, Gracely E, Myers B. The development of sex role stereotypes in the third year: relationships to gender labeling, gender identity, sex-typed toy preferences, and family characteristics. Child Dev. 1984; 55 :1493–503. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
West C, Zimmerman DH. Doing gender. In: Lorber J, Farrell SA, editors. The Social Construction of Gender. Sage; Thousand Oaks, CA: 1991. pp. 13–37. [ Google Scholar ]
Wilensky U. Learning and Computer-Based Modeling. Northwestern Univ.; Evanston, IL: 1997. NetLogo segregation model. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/models/Segregation . Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL. [ Google Scholar ] A NetLogo model that can be run with varying parameters; illustrates the emergence of segregation in a system
Williams GP. Chaos Theory Tamed. Joseph Henry Press; Washington, DC: 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
Witherington DC. The dynamic systems approach as a metatheory for development psychology. Hum. Dev. 2007; 50 :127–53. [ Google Scholar ]
Yee M, Brown R. The development of gender differentiation in young children. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 1994; 33 :183–96. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Younger BA, Fearing DD. Parsing items into separate categories: developmental change in infant categorization. Child Dev. 1999; 70 :291–303. [ Google Scholar ]
Zosuls KM, Ruble DN, Tamis-LeMonda CS, Shrout PE, Bornstein MH, Greulich FK. The acquisition of gender labels in infancy: implications for sex-typed play. Dev. Psychol. 2009; 45 :688–701. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zucker KJ, Bradley SJ. Gender Identity Disorder and Psychosexual Problems in Children and Adolescents. Guilford; New York: 1995. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zucker KJ, Wilson-Smith DN, Kurita JA, Stern A. Children's appraisals of sex-typed behavior in their peers. Sex Roles. 1995; 33 :703–25. [ Google Scholar ]

September 1, 2017

Beyond XX and XY: The Extraordinary Complexity of Sex Determination

A host of factors figure into whether someone is female, male or somewhere in between

By Amanda Montañez

Crop of diagram explaining how the factors determining biological sex can vary in intersex individuals.

Pitch Interactive and Amanda Montañez; Source: Research by Amanda Hobbs; Expert review by Amy Wisniewski University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Humans are socially conditioned to view sex and gender as binary attributes. From the moment we are born—or even before—we are definitively labeled “boy” or “girl.” Yet science points to a much more ambiguous reality. Determination of biological sex is staggeringly complex, involving not only anatomy but an intricate choreography of genetic and chemical factors that unfolds over time. Intersex individuals—those for whom sexual development follows an atypical trajectory—are characterized by a diverse range of conditions, such as 5-alpha reductase deficiency ( highlighted in graphic below ). A small cross section of these conditions and the pathways they follow is shown here. In an additional layer of complexity, the gender with which a person identifies does not always align with the sex they* are assigned at birth, and they may not be wholly male or female. The more we learn about sex and gender, the more these attributes appear to exist on a spectrum.

*The English language has long struggled with the lack of a widely recognized nongendered third-person singular pronoun. A singular form of “they” has grown in widespread acceptance, and many people who do not identify with a binary gender use it .

Credit: Pitch Interactive and Amanda Montañez; Source: Research by Amanda Hobbs; Expert review by Amy Wisniewski University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center

16 Ways Pregnancy Symptoms Predict Gender

Your changes have been saved

Email Is sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

8 Strollers That Are Really Easy To Steer

Gifts to help make life easier for parents with two under two, 8 best nursery gliders and rockers that fit any theme.

This article was originally published on February 15, 2017. It was updated on January 28, 2021 by Katrina Butcher.

It can be a long nine months waiting to find out if it's going to be a boy or a girl, especially if baby is being uncooperative at the 20-week scan. Ordinarily, most parents-to-be will be asked, when having an ultrasound, if they would like to find out the sex of their growing baby. It is typically possible to tell the gender from a scan after 16 weeks , sometimes earlier, at 12 weeks, if the “nub theory” is used. But, of course, many little babies are not accommodating and don't let the sonographer have a good enough look to see if they are a boy or a girl. It can be disappointing to leave a scan with an uncertain gender in mind, especially if you were very keen to know the sex.

There are, however, other ways to find out if you are having a boy or a girl. Many consider these methods to be old wives’ tales. We shouldn't rely completely on their use in predicting gender as they are unreliable, but they can be fun to do. I know in my case, many of them were true and rightly predicted both my girls.

In fact, just this month, scientists have discovered that a woman's immunity plays quite a large part in determining the gender of her unborn child. Many women experience pregnancy differently depending on whether they are carrying a boy or a girl. Symptoms such as nausea or certain cravings can give you an inkling about whether you should be searching for a boys or girls name. Researchers have determined that a woman's immune responses play a role in establishing whether they are having a boy or girl.

According to The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center , postdoctoral researcher Amanda Mitchell says, "This research helps women, and their obstetricians, recognize that fetal sex is one factor that may impact how a woman's body responds to everyday immune challenges."

So, while many would say that these are old wives’ tales, we now have evidence that suggests our bodies do in fact react differently to pregnancy depending on whether it's a boy or girl. There seems to always be some level of truth to old wives’ tales but let's not celebrate just yet unless a scan or blood test reveals the gender for certain!

16 Morning Sickness?

third trimester morning sickness is more common than you think

Morning sickness has long been a significant sign as to whether you are having a boy or a girl. It's often believed that if you suffer from Hyperemesis Gravidarum, extreme morning sickness, then you are having a girl, reports What to Expect . While there are always exceptions to this rule, several scientists have thoroughly researched this phenomenon and have backed up the claim, according to Springer Link . It would appear that the hormones produced by a baby girl during pregnancy can make moms feel overly nauseated with a higher level of sickness throughout the pregnancy in comparison to baby boys.

Severe morning sickness in the first trimester is often considered an indicator of a baby girl. However, don't rush out to buy pale pink onesies just yet as this method of predicting a baby's gender is not fool proof. There are many women who suffered morning sickness at the beginning for it to taper off and come back again, and they ended up having beautiful baby boys.

But let me tell you, I had severe morning sickness with both my girls. The first lasted the entire nine months and the second five months. So, I believe in this one!

15 Positioning Of The Linea Nigra

Do you have a dark line reaching down over your belly bump? This dark line is called the Linea Nigra and is a very common symptom of pregnancy. They say that if this line reaches from your navel to your pubic bone, then you are having a girl. If it reaches above your navel, reports Refinery 29 , and travels from your pubic bone to under your rib cage, then you are having a boy.

I'll be honest, with both of my girls, I didn't have a Linea Nigra at all. Sporting no line along my bump meant I would have been left in the dark about my girls' gender if this was the only method to predict your baby's sex. So, while this is a cute way to try and predict the gender, it is most certainly not fool proof.

RELATED: Social Distancing Approved: How To Throw A Drive-By Gender Reveal

14 Speed Of The Baby’s Heart Beat

The theory behind using the fetal heart rate as a way to predict the gender of your baby states that if the heart rate is above 140 beats per minute (BPM) then you are likely to have a girl, according to TODAY. If it's under 140BPM then you're considered to be having a boy. This prediction method is harmless to try and also quite easy. At your next ante-natal appointment, simply count the number of beats or ask your midwife or doctor how many beats per minute they can hear.

There is no existing evidence that proves this method works, however, and I, for one, am a little dubious. Before my first baby was born, I was attached to the trace machine monitoring my baby's heartbeat for quite a few hours. Her heart rate was fairly low, never reaching above the golden line of 140BPM, despite her being in no danger or stress. Take what you will from this one, but I wouldn't use it as a reliable method of prediction since it didn't work for me.

13 Carrying High Or Low?

Mom Raising Awareness About Pregnancy Condition That Forever Changed Her Life

This old wives’ tale says that if you're carrying low or down in the front then you are having a boy and if you're carrying high, reports Winchester Hospital , and appear wide in the middle then it's more than likely a girl. Equally, if you're bump is neat, and all of your pregnancy weight is around your waist, then this indicates a girl.

I carried high on both my girls and was relatively neat, so this one worked for me. But is this due to my petite stature and good posture or a genuine way to determine if someone is having a boy or a girl? More often than not, the muscle structure around your waist has a tendency to determine how your bump will look . Pregnancy results in your muscles relaxing as your body expands to accommodate your growing baby. The softer and weaker your muscles are, the more likely your bump is to hang lower. Bear in mind, that the more pregnancies you have, the more elastic your muscles become. So, on your third pregnancy you may notice your bump hangs a little bit lower.

12 Increased Hunger

Mexican food can induce labor with all of the peppers used in the dishes

We all know that during pregnancy we are eating for two, but is it a boy or a girl ? They say that if you find yourself reaching into the pantry or raiding the fridge like a teenage boy home from college for the holidays, then you may in fact be expecting a boy. Research suggests that moms-to-be often carrying boys tend to eat more than their counter parts who are carrying girls, according to What to Expect .

This indeed could be related to the level of testosterone which is surging through your pregnant body. Baby boys, even in the womb, may need more energy, resulting in an increased appetite for the mother. As a result, baby boys tend to be heavier at birth than baby girls.

Ordinarily, I eat like a rabbit so any increase in appetite was an oddity to me.

11 Sugar And Spice And All Things Nice

And on that note of increased appetite, just what exactly are you craving? As the old rhyme goes "Snips and snails, and puppy dogs’ tails, That's what little boys are made of. Sugar and spice and all things nice, That's what little girls are made of." Pregnancy cravings can have an indication as to whether you are carrying a boy or girl. They say that if you crave salty foods like potato chips, popcorn, and pretzels then you are carrying a boy. If your sweet tooth has come into full effect, then it's a girl, according to Parents.

Your body has a way of getting you to eat the foods it needs you to eat and more so in pregnancy as your cravings can be completely uncharacteristic to what you would normally eat. Some also say that pregnancy hormones change how certain foods taste and smell to you during pregnancy, meaning something you would never have touched before all of a sudden is very appealing.

I don't have a huge sweet tooth, but with both of my girls, jellies and sugar were my vice!

10 Hormone Levels

Pregnancy hormones have an awful lot to answer for when it comes to feeling moody during those nine months. Hormones are wreaking absolute havoc with your emotions. One minute you’re laughing, and the next you are crying for absolutely no reason which only makes you cry worse and harder.

Strong emotional mood swings are thought to mean that you're having a girl, reports Medical News Today . In my case, yes, this was another pregnancy symptom that easily predicted my baby's gender. But waiting for your newborn and planning for life ahead with a growing family is a very emotional time in a person’s life. It’s no wonder mood swings are unpredictable.

However, they do say that if you have more mood swings and emotional outbursts during those nine months, then you are more than likely having a baby girl.

9 Increased Breast Size

Apparently, keeping a close eye on your breasts during pregnancy is a sure-fire way to predict the gender of your baby, according to Healthline Parenthood . Naturally, your breasts will get bigger to some extent during pregnancy as your body prepares for the impending arrival of your baby and gets ready for you to possibly breastfeed. It's claimed that the amount of testosterone released from your growing baby will have an effect on the size of your bosom. The less testosterone, the less your breasts will grow as the hormone will damper your growth. This, of course, indicates that you are more than likely due a baby boy. Additionally, you will more than likely experience sore breasts during pregnancy.

Also, bear in mind that they say if your areola's become darker during pregnancy then you are more than likely carrying a boy.

8 Left Breast Bigger Than The Right

This Fertility Treatment Is Boosting Live Births After Breast Cancer

And, of course, according to the old wives’ tale, as your breasts change shape due to the natural injection of additional hormones to your body, they say that if one breast grows larger than the other then you are having a girl. But of course, only if it's the left breast, according to TODAY . If the right breast is bigger than the left than it's a boy.

It's unknown where this pregnancy prediction method came from, but I think it's safe to say that we can all be a little dubious about this one. Besides that, it's often quite common for women to have one breast larger than the other. As your breasts prepare themselves for lactation and go up a cup size or two then it's only natural for them to change based on the size and shape of your breasts before pregnancy.

7 Acne Development

UPDATED 16 Ways Pregnancy Symptoms Predict Gender

Are you suffering from more acne than normal? Apparently, acne during pregnancy can indicate that you are carrying a girl, reports Belly Belly . On occasion, acne can occur during the first trimester as your body is flushed with extra hormones which take over. These extra hormones do our skin no good and it's relatively common for pregnant women to feel like they are reliving their teenage years, reaching for the concealer to cover up those flaring spots.

In comparison, if you have a perfect complexion with glowing skin, then this could indicate that you are having a boy.

With both of my girls, I suffered frustrating acne on my face, neck, and back which cleared up in the second trimester and brought me back to that glowing pregnancy state with strong hair, nails, and beautiful skin. I'll admit - I was glad this pregnancy symptom didn't last too long as it was worse than when I was in my teens and early twenties! But it also rightly predicted that I was carrying girls.

6 Hairy Legs

According to TODAY, if your body hair is growing quicker than normal then you are more than likely carrying a boy. So, if you have to shave more often , which let's face it, is a nightmare and almost impossible to do the further along in your pregnancy you get, then start hunting for all things blue. If your hair growth is lower or hasn't changed at all, then it's possible that a girl is coming your way.

The same can be said if your hair becomes thick and glossy and the envy of every other woman in the office, then it's a boy. This also includes if your nails are thick and strong. The reason behind using this method of predicting gender comes from the fact that pregnant women carry more estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone during pregnancy than they normally would and so the result often appears in hair growth or lack thereof. The extra testosterone, influencing hair and nail growth, can indicate that you are carrying a boy due to the male hormone. Or, so they say.

I can't say if I can recall quicker or slower hair growth with my two girls. I will definitely keep an eye out for this symptom on my next one!

5 Clumsier Than Normal

body positive quotes to help you love your pregnant body

Becoming clumsier in pregnancy is often a give-in because our center of balance is thrown off along with our burgeoning belly bump. I, for one, have dropped, tripped, and slipped so often during my pregnancies that I stopped making excuses or apologizing for it. Throw pregnancy exhaustion, hormonal changes, and baby brain into the mix and clumsiness can become your new best friend.

They say that a heightened level of clumsiness, however, can also be an indicator that you are having a boy, according to Birth Center Stone Oak . The explanation and reasoning behind this one is very unclear and I'll be honest, I'm not too sure how they came up with this one!

I am clumsy by nature so I really couldn't use this one as a valid gender prediction test on my two!

4 Dry Skin Like The Sahara Desert

Dry skin, like dry hands or dry lips, during pregnancy is a common complaint and pregnancy symptom. But did you know that this can also be an indicator as to whether you are carrying a boy or a girl. The effect pregnancy has on your skin occurs due to our old friend, hormonal changes. In addition, the changes to your eating habits can also have an effect on your skin changes.

Throughout pregnancy your body goes through incredible changes as your skin stretches to accommodate your growing baby. Some say that dry skin can indicate that you are having a boy, reports TODAY ,. Whereas soft and supple skin could mean you are having a girl.

Admittedly, for me, I suffered dry skin with both of my girls so this one didn't ring true for me. On the other hand, perhaps I was simply dehydrated!

3 Cold, Cold Feet

While many of us suffer with dreaded cold feet even on the sunniest of days, if you find that your feet are more insufferably colder now during pregnancy, then it may suggest that you are having a boy, according to Parents. If your feet are lovely, toasty, and as warm as ever, then you may be having a girl.

It's completely unknown how this method of predicting gender in pregnancy started doing the rounds. Like all gender predicting methods, it has its followers, and some swear by its accuracy.

I have cold feet all year round, but I did notice that I uncharacteristically enjoyed wearing flip flips and sandals in the summer months when pregnant with both of my girls.

2 More Toilet Time

Having to go to the toilet frequently sign of pregnancy

Many believe that the color of a pregnant woman's urine can correctly predict the gender of her child. According to Belly Belly, dull-colored urine predicts a boy while a bright color indicates a baby girl. Generally, the color of a person’s urine is determined by how much liquid they drink throughout the day. The more liquid they drink, the lighter the color. I think it's safe to assume that this method of predicting gender is one for the comic books. Let's move on!

1 Throbbing Temples

How To Cope When Your Body Feels Like Mothering But You've Suffered A Miscarriage (Or Stillbirth)

Headaches in pregnancy are an unfortunate side effect of pregnancy which, if you never suffered headaches on a routine basis before, can be very difficult to deal with. They say that headaches can also accurately predict the gender of your baby. If you suffer headaches during pregnancy, according to TODAY ,, then you are likely to be carrying a boy. Headache and throbbing temples free? Then it very well could be a girl.

Headaches can be a result of surging pregnancy hormones and an increase in blood volume. They can especially be more common in the first trimester.

As a longtime migraine sufferer, I was over the moon when my migraines and headaches completely stopped as soon as I became pregnant with my first baby girl. However, with my second daughter, the headaches came back with a vengeance. So, this prediction method was literally 50/50 for me.

NEXT: Gender Disappointment Doesn't Make You A Bad Mom

Sources: The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center , What to Expect , Refinery 29 , TODAY , Parents , Healthline Parenthood , Birth Center Stone Oak , Winchester Hospital , What to Expect

gender reveal
Second trimester

Search Menu
Sign in through your institution
Advance articles
Special Issues
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access
Self Archiving Policy
Why publish with this journal?
About Translational Behavioral Medicine
About Society of Behavioral Medicine
Journal Staff
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Lay summary, introduction, the influence of gender on health [new and reorganized section], nih activities related to gender and health, gaps and opportunities, acknowledgements, compliance with ethical standards.

< Previous

Gender as a social and structural variable: research perspectives from the National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Elizabeth Barr, Ronna Popkin, Erik Roodzant, Beth Jaworski, Sarah M Temkin, Gender as a social and structural variable: research perspectives from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Translational Behavioral Medicine , Volume 14, Issue 1, January 2024, Pages 13–22, https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibad014

Permissions Icon Permissions

Gender is a social and structural variable that encompasses multiple domains, each of which influences health: gender identity and expression, gender roles and norms, gendered power relations, and gender equality and equity. As such, gender has far-reaching impacts on health. Additional research is needed to continue delineating and untangling the effects of gender from the effects of sex and other biological variables. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) vision for women’s health is a world in which the influence of sex and/or gender are integrated into the health research enterprise. However, much of the NIH-supported research on gender and health has, to date, been limited to a small number of conditions (e.g., HIV, mental health, pregnancy) and locations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa; India). Opportunities exist to support transdisciplinary knowledge transfer and interdisciplinary knowledge building by advancing health-related social science research that incorporates best practices from disciplines that have well-established methods, theories, and frameworks for examining the health impacts of gender and other social, cultural, and structural variables.

Gender encompasses multiple domains, each of which influences health: identity and expression; roles and norms; relations; and power. This commentary focuses on gender-related research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH); identifies areas of opportunity for future health research efforts on gender; and articulates a vision for the robust, transdisciplinary incorporation of gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable into the NIH research agenda. The NIH vision for women’s health is a world in which the influence of sex and/or gender are integrated into the health research enterprise. However, much of the NIH-supported research on gender and health has, to date, been limited to a small number of conditions (e.g., HIV, mental health, pregnancy) and locations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa; India). Approaching the influences of gender on health with scientific rigor is critical to advancing health research that promotes health equity.

Gender is a multidimensional construct with multiple domains that influence human health: identity and expression; roles and norms; relations; and power ( Fig. 1 ) [ 1–4 ]. Gender identity refers to a core element of a person’s individual sense of self and gender expression describes how a person communicates their gender to others through their behavior and appearance. Gender roles and norms are social domains reflecting cultural expectations and perceptions about how a person should behave, act, or express themselves based on their perceived or attributed gender. Gendered relations are interpersonal and intergroup interactions and dynamics, embedded in social structures, and larger systems of power. Power describes the structures and systems of inequity based upon gender that reproduce, shape, and constrain opportunities and experiences for individuals and groups. Other sociodemographic variables, such as race [ 5 ] and ethnicity [ 6 ]; socioeconomic status [ 7 ]; and structural factors, such as state [ 8 ] or federal policies [ 9 ], interact with gender, highlighting the importance of considering intersectionality [ 10 ] in the design, conduct, and analysis of health research [ 11 ].

The domains of sex and gender.

In scientific literature, policy documents, media, and general conversation, gender is frequently conflated with the separate and distinct concept of sex. Sex is a multidimensional biological construct based on traits (sex traits) that include anatomy, physiology, genetics, and hormonal milieu [ 1 ]. Foundational work by social epidemiologist Nancy Krieger articulates that, “The relevance of gender relations and sex-linked biology to a given health outcome is an empirical question, not a philosophical principle; depending on the health outcome under study, both, neither, one, or the other may be relevant—as sole, independent, or synergistic determinants” [ 12 ]. In other words, sex (a biological variable) and gender (a social, cultural, and structural variable) act both independently of each other and in ways that can complement, enhance, diminish, or negate the other’s influence on health. Well-established bodies of literature in gender and women’s studies, public health, sociology, psychology, demography, epidemiology, and other fields explore the far-reaching effects of gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable. To understand how social systems influence health, the civil, political, economic, and cultural factors that lead to differences in the basic determinants of health—such as access to nutritious food, clean air and water, housing, and safe living conditions—they must be identified, measured, and included in research. Indeed, approaching the influences of gender on health with scientific rigor is critical to advancing health research that promotes health equity. This commentary focuses on gender-related research at NIH; identifies areas of opportunity for future health research efforts on gender; and articulates a vision for the robust, transdisciplinary incorporation of gender as a social and structural variable into the NIH research agenda.

As a multidimensional and multi-level construct, gender links individual identity to social and cultural expectations about status, characteristics, and behavior as they are associated with certain sex traits [ 1 ]. Each domain of gender has significant impacts on people’s day-to-day lives, career opportunities, family dynamics, and health. Assumptions about gender permeate human interactions, social norms, and structural systems, making a multi-level framework useful for understanding how gender influences health [ 13 ].

Gender identity and expression influence individuals’ health. A growing body of research on gender identity and health has focused on transgender and non-binary individuals, but gender identity is also relevant to the health of cisgender individuals. Exogenous hormone therapies—whether used as part for treatment of menopausal symptoms, gender-affirming care [ 14 ] or other reasons—as well as with post-mastectomy breast reconstructions [ 15 ] are examples of gender identity influencing the health of women. Gender expression can affect musculoskeletal health: women are often encouraged or required to wear and walk in high-heeled shoes which contribute to the increased risk for women of developing osteoarthritis later in life due to excess stress on knee joints [ 16 ].

Gender roles can limit girls’ and women’s access to health services [ 2 , 17 ] and shape patient-provider interactions. Gender bias has demonstrated associations with diagnostic delays among women for diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular disease [ 18 , 19 ]. Symptoms that are typical for women have historically been labeled atypical in defining the clinical presentation of serious events, such as myocardial infarction (MI); instead, these events have historically been defined by symptoms more common in men [ 3 ]. Gender bias —reflected in part through the centering of men’s symptoms in medical training and textbooks—contributes to misdiagnosis of MI and lower survival for women compared to men for a variety of conditions [ 20 ]. In other health contexts, gendered power relations affect the dismissal of physical pain symptoms as emotional, psychological, or even as hysterical when reported by women [ 21 ], and intersectional analyses reveal stark race- and gender-based differences in pain management [ 22 ]. Norms of masculinity also shape men’s and boys’ health, healthcare seeking, relationships, and exposure to violence [ 23–27 ].

Gendered power relations can exacerbate health risks [ 28 ], particularly for multiply-marginalized women [ 5 , 29 ], and structural sexism [ 4 ] interacts with other structural determinants [ 30 ] to perpetuate gendered health inequities [ 31 ]. On a global scale, pervasive gender inequality negatively impacts the health of women [ 32 , 33 ]. In addition to the influence of gender on the social determinants of health and access to healthcare, gender roles, relations, and power dynamics influence healthcare delivery and practices, with gender inequality contributing to disparities in healthcare for women [ 2 ]. For women, exposure to structural sexism is associated with the diagnosis of chronic conditions, worse self-rated health, and worse physical functioning [ 34 ].

Structural sexism not only influences health, but also impacts who provides healthcare for women and participates in research on women’s health. The healthcare workforce is predominantly made up of women, and clinicians who are women are more likely to provide healthcare to women [ 35 ]. Yet clinicians who are women face inequities that include discrimination, lower compensation, and fewer opportunities for advancement and leadership [ 36 , 37 ]. Lower reimbursement rates for many female-specific procedures also perpetuate a lower status for clinicians who provide care to women [ 37–39 ]. Similarly, women’s health research is also more often performed by women than men and has been shown to be less publishable—and when published, less impactful—than research focused on men [ 40 ]. While in medicine, women’s health has traditionally been equated with reproductive health, persistent stigma around female-specific conditions and events such as menstruation and menopause contributes to inadequate treatments and limited research investment in these domains [ 41 ]. Moreover, although approximately half of participants in NIH-supported clinical trials are women [ 42 ], female participants remain underrepresented in clinical trials for several health conditions that cause substantial morbidity in women, including HIV disease, kidney diseases, and cardiovascular diseases [ 43 ].

The Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) was established in response to concerns about women’s underrepresentation in NIH-supported clinical and biomedical research in the early 1990s. The historical exclusion of women from clinical research rested on the gendered construction of a “normal” study participant as a 70 kg male, concerns that the normal hormonal fluctuations of the menstrual cycles might interfere with study results, and fears that enrollment of subjects capable of pregnancy might potentially lead to a teratogenic fetal exposure. The requirement that NIH-funded researchers enroll racial and ethnic minorities and women, including women of childbearing age, into clinical research trials was codified into Federal law in the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 [ 44 ].

As the legislatively mandated focal point for coordinating research on the health of women at NIH, ORWH collaborates with the NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) and the broader scientific community to advance research on the health of women. ORWH supports research aligned with the NIH vision for women’s health research, detailed in the Advancing Science for the Health of Women: 2019–2023 Trans-NIH Strategic Plan for Women’s Health Research, in which the influence of sex and/or gender are integrated into the health research enterprise; every woman receives evidence-based disease prevention and treatment tailored to her own needs, circumstances, and goals; and women in science careers reach their full potential [ 45 ]. This Strategic Plan promotes coordination of efforts related to women’s health research across NIH ICOs and to develop methods and leverage data sources to consider sex and gender influences that enhance research for the health of women [ 45,46 ].

In addition to the NIH-Wide Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2021–2025 that outlines NIH’s highest priorities and vision for biomedical research direction, capacity, and stewardship, each ICO develops an individual strategic plan specific to the ICO’s mission and fields of study [ 47 ]. Many of these ICO Strategic Plans incorporate goals and objectives related to gender, and gender-related themes emerge across them. These themes include understanding gender influences on disease processes and outcomes, developing interventions specific to women’s health needs, improving the representation of women in clinical research studies, and eliminating health disparities for women. Multiple ICO strategic plans and the NIH-Wide Strategic Plan also highlight training, infrastructure, and capacity-building as strategies to enhance diversity in the health research workforce.

Partnered with other NIH ICOs, ORWH supports several signature programs that incorporate research related to gender, including an administrative supplement program for research on sex and gender influences on health and an administrative supplement that supports interdisciplinary research on populations of women that are understudied, under-represented, and under-reported (U3) in biomedical research. In addition, the Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health (BIRCWH) program is a mentored career development program supporting women’s health researchers. Additional current and recent NIH funding opportunities that specify an interest in research related to gender are listed in Table 1 . Potential applicants are encouraged to reach out to the scientific contacts for these programs to discuss potential submissions, and to consult the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts ( https://grants.nih.gov/funding/searchguide/index.html#/ ) regularly as new funding opportunities and notices are posted daily.

Selected current and recent gender-related funding opportunities

Funding opportunity/notice .	Participating ICOs .
A new research education program from ORWH, (RFA-OD-22-015) will support the development of courses, curricula, or methods focused on how health is influenced by gender, as an identity, social, cultural, or structural variable, and/or sex, as a biological variable	ORWH; NIA; NIAMS; NIDA; NIMHD; NLM; NIDCR; OBSSR; OAR; SGMRO
ORWH’s includes administrative supplements (NOT-OD-22-208) targeting interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and multidisciplinary research focused on the effects of sex and/or gender influences at the intersection of several social determinants—including, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education, health literacy, gender identity, and urban or rural residence—in human health and illness	ORWH; NEI; NHLBI; NIA; NIAAA; NIAID; NIAMS; NIBIB; NICHD; NIDCD; NIDCR; NIDDK; NIDA; NIEHS; NIGMS; NIMH; NINDS; NINR; NCCIH; NCI; SGMRO; ONR
NIAID’s Transgender People: Immunity, Prevention, and Treatment of HIV and STIs R21 (PAR-22-186) will support short duration, high-risk and innovative, hypothesis-generating research focused on describing the systemic and mucosal impact of the drugs, hormones and surgical interventions used for gender reassignment and their impact on susceptibility to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI) in transgender people	NIAID
NIAID’s R01 (RFA-AI-21-058) will support research that combines epidemiologic methods, digital technology, and data science approaches to better understand HIV prevention, transmission, and early care-cascade points for women living in the USA	NIAID; NIAAA; NICHD; NIDA; NIMH; OBSSR; ORWH
NICHD’s R43/R44 (PAR-21-297) and NIAID’s R01 (PAR-22-222) will support development of multipurpose technologies that prevent HIV infection and pregnancy (hormonal and non-hormonal methods) in adolescent and young women, and encourages bio-behavioural and behavioural/social studies to identify MPT end user preferences factors (look, feel, effectiveness, safety and duration of action) and other behavioral/social factors that could promote increased MPT use in adolescent and young women	NICHD; NIAID; NIMH
NIA’s (NOT-AG-21-050) Notice of Special Interest (NOSI) promotes multidisciplinary research to clarify sex and gender differences in the risk, development, progression, diagnosis, and clinical presentation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Alzheimer’s disease-related dementias (ADRD). It includes social level factors (e.g., history of maltreatment or adversity, parenthood, marital status, educational attainment, socioeconomic and employment status) and healthcare system-level (e.g., access to care) factors and processes that separately, or together, may drive observed differences by sex and gender and/or may operate differently by sex and gender	NIA
NIMH’s (NOT-MH-22-245) outlines NIMH priorities in the field of women’s mental health research, including research projects that examine biological, social, cultural, and behavioural contributions of sex and gender influences on mental illnesses (e.g., anxiety, depression, psychosis, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, trauma-related disorders, eating disorders, etc.) autism spectrum disorder and suicide in adolescent girls and young women	NIMH
NIDA’s (NOT-DA-22-047) communicates NIDA’s special interest in understanding the neurobiological bases for sex or gender-specific differences in HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders	NIDA

Funding opportunity/notice .	Participating ICOs .
A new research education program from ORWH, (RFA-OD-22-015) will support the development of courses, curricula, or methods focused on how health is influenced by gender, as an identity, social, cultural, or structural variable, and/or sex, as a biological variable	ORWH; NIA; NIAMS; NIDA; NIMHD; NLM; NIDCR; OBSSR; OAR; SGMRO
ORWH’s includes administrative supplements (NOT-OD-22-208) targeting interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary, and multidisciplinary research focused on the effects of sex and/or gender influences at the intersection of several social determinants—including, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education, health literacy, gender identity, and urban or rural residence—in human health and illness	ORWH; NEI; NHLBI; NIA; NIAAA; NIAID; NIAMS; NIBIB; NICHD; NIDCD; NIDCR; NIDDK; NIDA; NIEHS; NIGMS; NIMH; NINDS; NINR; NCCIH; NCI; SGMRO; ONR
NIAID’s Transgender People: Immunity, Prevention, and Treatment of HIV and STIs R21 (PAR-22-186) will support short duration, high-risk and innovative, hypothesis-generating research focused on describing the systemic and mucosal impact of the drugs, hormones and surgical interventions used for gender reassignment and their impact on susceptibility to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI) in transgender people	NIAID
NIAID’s R01 (RFA-AI-21-058) will support research that combines epidemiologic methods, digital technology, and data science approaches to better understand HIV prevention, transmission, and early care-cascade points for women living in the USA	NIAID; NIAAA; NICHD; NIDA; NIMH; OBSSR; ORWH
NICHD’s R43/R44 (PAR-21-297) and NIAID’s R01 (PAR-22-222) will support development of multipurpose technologies that prevent HIV infection and pregnancy (hormonal and non-hormonal methods) in adolescent and young women, and encourages bio-behavioural and behavioural/social studies to identify MPT end user preferences factors (look, feel, effectiveness, safety and duration of action) and other behavioral/social factors that could promote increased MPT use in adolescent and young women	NICHD; NIAID; NIMH
NIA’s (NOT-AG-21-050) Notice of Special Interest (NOSI) promotes multidisciplinary research to clarify sex and gender differences in the risk, development, progression, diagnosis, and clinical presentation of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Alzheimer’s disease-related dementias (ADRD). It includes social level factors (e.g., history of maltreatment or adversity, parenthood, marital status, educational attainment, socioeconomic and employment status) and healthcare system-level (e.g., access to care) factors and processes that separately, or together, may drive observed differences by sex and gender and/or may operate differently by sex and gender	NIA
NIMH’s (NOT-MH-22-245) outlines NIMH priorities in the field of women’s mental health research, including research projects that examine biological, social, cultural, and behavioural contributions of sex and gender influences on mental illnesses (e.g., anxiety, depression, psychosis, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, trauma-related disorders, eating disorders, etc.) autism spectrum disorder and suicide in adolescent girls and young women	NIMH
NIDA’s (NOT-DA-22-047) communicates NIDA’s special interest in understanding the neurobiological bases for sex or gender-specific differences in HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders	NIDA

NIH is committed to fostering a culture of scientific stewardship and encourages broad and diverse input from the research community, public forums through consultation with advocacy groups, professional societies, and research participants. Aligned with this commitment and to inform a congressionally-requested conference on key issues in women’s health ( Advancing NIH Research on the Health of Women: A 2021 Conference ) [ 48 ], in 2021 ORWH published a Request for Information (RFI) in the Federal Register (86 FR 35099). Themes in the public comments related to gender were of particular concern in responses to the RFI including: intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual violence, and gender-based violence; intersectional stigma and discrimination in healthcare settings; and gender inequity.

Internal NIH roundtables

In recognition of the significant health impacts of gender as a social and cultural variable, ORWH and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) convened a series of roundtable discussions for NIH staff in fall 2021. These roundtables brought together scientific and program staff from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institute on Aging (NIA), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Fogarty International Center (FIC), NICHD, Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research (OBSSR), Office of Disease Prevention (ODP), ORWH, and the Sexual and Gender Minority Research Office (SGMRO). Participants discussed how research on gender and health aligned with their ICO priorities; the landscape of research on gender roles, gender norms, and gender inequity; and gaps and opportunities in this domain. Themes that emerged included the key roles of intersectionality and a life course perspective in research on gender and health, gaps in the scientific literature on the mechanisms through which gender influences health, and the need for improved methods for studying and measuring gender equity and discrimination. The development of NIH-focused resources on gender and health for study section reviewers and NIH program staff was also identified as an area of opportunity.

Portfolio analysis

In follow-up to the internal roundtable discussions, a portfolio analysis was performed to clarify areas of strength and gaps in NIH-supported science on gender and health. The analysis included competing (Type 1 and Type 2) NIH awards issued from FY2017 through FY2022 1 that focused on the relationships between gender roles, relations, power dynamics, or (in)equity and health. The specific aims of awarded projects that included gender-related terms in the title or specific aims were reviewed for relevance, and projects were included if they explicitly addressed structural sexism, gender norms, gender power dynamics, or inequities. Across the six fiscal years, 204 competing awards were focused on gender and health, with sixteen of the 27 NIH institutes and centers (ICs) issuing at least one new gender-related award. Over half of the awards (55%, N = 113) were supported by three Institutes: NIMH, NICHD, and the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (NIMHD)—comparatively small Institutes that together account for 11% of the NIH portfolio ( Fig. 2 ). The concentration of gender-related research in this small proportion of ICOs suggests that gender has not been integrated across the breadth of the NIH portfolio. Further, gender-related awards constituted fewer than 1% of the overall competing awards NIMH, NICHD, and NIMHD issued across the same time period, suggesting opportunities for greater integration of gender-related research even within the ICs that have the largest gender and health portfolios.

NIH portfolio of gender-related research, FY2017–FY22. Top: number of gender-related competing grant awards, by Institute, Center, and Office (ICO) and fiscal year; bottom: all NIH competing grant awards, FY2017–FY2022, by ICO (total N = 124,364 grant awards).

Over 80% of the competing awards on gender and health are within one of five activity code categories: Major Research Project Grants (28%, N = 57), Exploratory/Developmental Research Grants (20%, N = 40), Career Development Awards (16%, N = 32), Predoctoral Fellowships (10%, N = 20), and Small Research Grants (8%, N = 16). The remaining awards were primarily clinical trial planning grants; small business awards; or other fellowship, mentored research, or training awards. Among the recent gender-related awards, HIV prevention and mental health were the most common topics addressed, followed by sexual assault, cancer, and unintended pregnancy ( Fig. 3 ). Many awards in the portfolio were focused on non-U.S. populations in areas where HIV prevalence remains high, such as countries in Africa or South Asia. Similarly, among the gender-related projects based in the USA, many focused on Black and/or Latinx populations, who disproportionately bear the burden of new HIV infections.

Major topics of gender-related awards, FY2017–FY2022. This visualization was prepared using the NIH Office of Portfolio Analysis iSearch technology and Visualize Results feature. Visualize Results uses a clustering algorithm (lingo3g) which takes words and phrases from the Chemicals and Drugs, Targets, and MeSH fields. The clusters displayed are scaled to the number of publications. Words are clustered based on how often they occur together in the same document. Before clustering, documents are preprocessed using stemming, stop words, and synonym normalization. CVD cardiovascular disease; DSD differences in sex development; PrEP pre-exposure prophylaxis.

Scientific workshop: “Gender and health: impacts of structural sexism, gender norms, relational power dynamics, and gender inequities”

Building on the findings in the portfolio analysis and the generative conversations from the internal NIH roundtables, ORWH and NICHD convened a scientific workshop titled Gender and Health: Impacts of structural sexism, gender norms, relational power dynamics, and gender inequities . The virtual workshop convened on October 26, 2022, in partnership with NIA, NIAID, NCI, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), NIMH, the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), and OBSSR. The workshop convened NIH staff, members of the external scientific community, and the public to discuss methods, measurement, interventions, and best practices in health research on gender as a social and cultural variable.

The overarching goal of the workshop was to identify opportunities to advance research on the health impacts of structural sexism, gender norms, relational power dynamics, and gender inequities. Specific workshop objectives included addressing issues in measurement and methods, identifying modifiable factors and points of intervention, highlighting interventions that target different levels of the relationships between gender and health, and fostering collaborations among scientists conducting research on gender and health. The morning session included plenary talks on gender norms, relational power dynamics, and gender inequity (Nancy Krieger, Ph.D.), structural sexism and policy considerations (Patricia Homan, Ph.D.), and intersectionality in research on gender and health (Typhanye Dyer, Ph.D., M.P.H.). The afternoon featured three concurrent sessions with a total of twelve presentations on measurement and methods of gender and structural sexism and modifiable social and clinical factors related to gender-related health disparities. A virtual poster hall exhibited research from new and established investigators in a broad range of scientific disciplines. The full day of presentations and posters are available for viewing on the ORWH website.

The well-documented and far-reaching health impacts of gender as a social and structural variable demonstrate the alignment of gender-related health research with the NIH mission to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and apply knowledge to enhance health. Yet, much of the NIH-supported research on gender and health has, to date, been limited to a discrete set of conditions (e.g., HIV, mental health, pregnancy) and locations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africa; India). Support for broader research on gender and health will promote rigorous health research and advance the health of women.

Healthcare and biomedical research has historically been centered around men and male bodies because of larger patriarchal social and cultural norms. Hence, the intersectional study of gender is a critical component of women’s health research, as the consequences of gender inequality affect women more acutely than men and historically marginalized racial and ethnic groups more than White individuals [ 2 , 11 , 49–51 ]. Women’s health research, as measured by the Manual Categorization System-Women’s Health (MCS-WH) reporting module, represented 10.8% of the NIH budget in FY 2020 ($4,446 million) [ 52 ]. NIH funding for conditions that predominantly affect women is lower than expected amounts based on the burdens of these diseases in the total U.S. population [ 53 ]. Although there is an association between burden of disease and NIH funding, historic funding for a condition or disease is the factor most strongly associated with continued funding, thereby perpetuating male bias in biomedical research [ 54 ].

Disaggregation of research data on sex and gender allows identification of and responses to how sex differences and gender inequalities affect health. In 2016, the 21st Century Cures Act (Public Law 114–255) required that applicable NIH-defined Phase III clinical trials report results by sex/gender, [sic] race, and ethnicity on ClinicalTrials.gov. A 2018 analysis demonstrated, however, that fewer than one third of NIH-supported phase III clinical trials report disaggregated results by sex or gender [ 42 ]. Reporting “sex/gender” of clinical research participants using “either/or” categories is the current standard, which limits the ability for researchers to understand and delineate the distinct influences of gender on health. Just as consistent collection of age and sex data is essential to better understanding of the health impacts of these biological variables, routine and consistent collection of gender data could significantly enhance our understanding of this social and structural variable, as well as its interactions with other drivers of inequalities such as age, ethnicity, poverty level or geographic location to influence health outcomes. Work is underway to establish standards for measuring sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity [ 1 ], but there is—as of yet—no consensus on how to measure other gendered phenomena in health research, and additional research to validate instruments in the collection of information about gender is needed [ 55–58 ]. At minimum, researchers are encouraged to use the term sex when reporting biological factors and gender when reporting gender identity or psychosocial or cultural factors; disaggregate demographic data and all outcome data by sex, gender, or both; report the methods used to obtain information on sex, gender, or both; and note all limitations of these methods [ 59 ].

Behavioral and social sciences research (BSSR) plays an important role in understanding health. At NIH, BSSR is defined as the systematic study of behavioral, mental, and social phenomena. Behavioral phenomena are the observable actions of individuals or groups, and mental phenomena include knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, motivations, perceptions, cognitions, and emotions. Social phenomena include interactions between and among individuals and responses to the characteristics, structures, and functions of social groups and institutions (e.g., families, communities, schools, and workplaces) and the physical, economic, cultural, and policy environments in which social and behavioral phenomena occur [ 60 ]. Increasingly, the NIH has focused its attention on research designed to better understand and address the impact of structural factors on health, with particular attention to the role of BSSR [ 61 ]. For example, following the police killing of George Floyd in May of 2020, the NIH made a public commitment to ending structural racism [ 62 ]. Centering the social and structural dimensions of gender in health-related BSSR can help researchers address complex challenges, particularly those stemming from social inequities.

Both BSSR and gender studies draw on multiple scientific disciplines, theories, and methodological approaches to better understand how complex, multi-level factors (e.g., individual behaviors, social relationships, environment, policy) interact with one another and influence health. The diversity and complexity of approaches in BSSR affords the formulation of novel questions and methodologies to address systems of power and oppression and create interventions that target the root causes of health and illness. Exploring the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional impacts of gender and its intersection with other socio-demographic factors, such as race, class, age, sexual orientation, rurality, and immigration status, may contribute to knowledge of when, how, and under what conditions attitudinal and structural oppression contribute to health disparities, which in turn could lead to the design of more impactful interventions for improving health. In sum, focusing on the multi-level and intersectional impacts of gender across the continuum of health is critical to expanding BSSR approaches and methods and advancing science to promote health equity.

Despite barriers to gender-related research, opportunities exist to support transdisciplinary knowledge transfer and interdisciplinary knowledge building by advancing health-related social science research that incorporates best practices from multiple disciplines (e.g., gender and women’s studies, sociology, psychology, medical humanities, and the population sciences) that have well-established methods, theories, and frameworks for examining the health impacts of gender and other social, cultural, and structural variables. A key opportunity is enhancing gender-related education and training for the health workforce. ORWH maintains a suite of E-Learning courses, including an introductory course titled Introduction to Sex and Gender: Core Concepts for Health-Related Research that explores sex, gender, and intersectionality as health-related variables, as well as the complexity within those domains. A new research education program from ORWH, Galvanizing Health Equity through Novel and Diverse Educational Resources (GENDER) R25 (RFA-OD-22-015) will support the development of courses, curricula, or methods focused on how health is influenced by gender, as an identity, social, cultural, or structural variable, and/or sex, as a biological variable.

A second critical opportunity is continued and expanded support for research that considers the multiple social, structural, biological, and behavioral factors that influence the health of women and individuals assigned female at birth, and the intersections of these factors. Gender is embedded in a complex milieu of social, structural, biological, and behavioral factors, and rigorous investigation of this complexity is essential to developing actionable interventions, addressing disparities, and advancing equity.

Recent NIH efforts on sexual harassment, structural racism, and maternal morbidity and mortality [ 63 ] demonstrate the NIH commitment to addressing complex social and structural factors that shape scientific culture and research and impact health. We are optimistic that, in partnership with the extramural community, NIH will continue advancing robust, transdisciplinary research on gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable across the NIH portfolio, building on successes in BSSR, HIV research, mental health, and global health.

Changing the culture to more rigorously consider gender and health is an ambitious, but achievable goal. Evidence from the successful implementation of NIH programs and policies such as UNITE [ 62 ], Community Partnerships to Advance Science for Society (ComPASS), and Sex as a Biological Variable (SABV) demonstrates that historical imbalances can be corrected through a combination of policy, education, and scientific will [ 64–66 ]. The robust NIH portfolio of research related to sexual and gender minority health following the establishment of SGMRO in 2015 demonstrates that gender-related research is a priority at NIH—the challenge now is to expand this portfolio to (i) include all domains of gender (identity and expression, roles and norms, gendered power relations, and gender equality and equity) and (ii) continue delineating and untangling the effects of gender on health from the effects of sex and other biological variables. Meeting this challenge will require precise and accurate terminology; changes in health research design, data collection, and reporting; expanded training and educational opportunities for NIH staff and the extramural community; and potential shifts in NIH policies to encourage these practices. Precedent at funding agencies like the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the European Commission suggests that policies on integration of gender as a social, cultural, and structural variable in health research can be instrumental in advancing research of relevance to all [ 67 ]. NIH envisions a world where every woman receives evidence-based disease prevention and treatment tailored to her circumstances, needs, and goals; catalyzing gender-related research can enhance and further this vision.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the authors only and do not necessarily represent the views, official policy, or position of the US Department of Health and Human Services or any of its affiliated institutions or agencies.

This commentary was not funded by any grants.

Conflict of Interest : All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human Rights : This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent : This manuscript is a commentary and does not involve original data collection, therefore informed consent was not required.

Welfare of Animals: This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Transparency Statement: This manuscript is a commentary and does not involve original data and thus no transparency statement is needed.

National Academies of Sciences E, and Medicine . Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation . Washington (DC) : National Academies Press ; 2022 .

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Heise L , Greene ME , Opper N , et al. ; Gender Equality, Norms, and Health Steering Committee . Gender inequality and restrictive gender norms: framing the challenges to health . Lancet. 2019 ; 393 ( 10189 ): 2440 – 2454 .

Gupta GR , Oomman N , Grown C , et al. ; Gender Equality, Norms, and Health Steering Committee . Gender equality and gender norms: framing the opportunities for health . Lancet. 2019 ; 393 ( 10190 ): 2550 – 2562 .

Homan P. Structural sexism and health in the united states: a new perspective on health inequality and the gender system . Am Sociol Rev. 2019 ; 84 ( 3 ): 486 – 516 .

Rosenthal L , Lobel M. Gendered racism and the sexual and reproductive health of Black and Latina Women . Ethn Health. 2020 ; 25 ( 3 ): 367 – 392 .

Rapp KS , Volpe VV , Neukrug H. State-level sexism and women’s health care access in the United States: differences by race/ethnicity, 2014–2019 . Am J Public Health. 2021 ; 111 ( 10 ): 1796 – 1805 .

Bullock HE , Reppond HA , Truong SV , Singh MR. An intersectional analysis of the feminization of homelessness and mothers’ housing precarity . J Soc Issues. 2020 ; 76 ( 4 ): 835 – 858 .

White K , Kumar B , Goyal V , Wallace R , Roberts SCM , Grossman D. Changes in abortion in texas following an executive order ban during the coronavirus pandemic . JAMA. 2021 ; 325 ( 7 ): 691 – 693 .

Hamilton ER , Langer PD , Patler C. DACA’s association with birth outcomes among mexican-origin mothers in the United States . Demography. 2021 ; 58 ( 3 ): 975 – 985 .

Bowleg L. The problem with the phrase women and minorities: intersectionality—an important theoretical framework for public health . Am J Public Health. 2012 ; 102 ( 7 ): 1267 – 1273 .

Alvidrez J , Greenwood GL , Johnson TL , Parker KL. Intersectionality in public health research: a view from the national institutes of health . Am J Public Health. 2021 ; 111 ( 1 ): 95 – 97 .

Krieger N. Genders, sexes, and health: what are the connections—and why does it matter ? Int J Epidemiol. 2003 ; 32 ( 4 ): 652 – 657 .

Krieger N. Discrimination and health inequities . Int J Health Serv. 2014 ; 44 ( 4 ): 643 – 710 .

Hembree WC , Cohen-Kettenis PT , Gooren L , et al. . Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline . J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017 ; 102 ( 11 ): 3869 – 3903 .

Hart AM , Pinell-White X , Losken A. The psychosexual impact of postmastectomy breast reconstruction . Ann Plast Surg. 2016 ; 77 ( 5 ): 517 – 522 .

Titchenal MR , Asay JL , Favre J , Andriacchi TP , Chu CR. Effects of high heel wear and increased weight on the knee during walking . J Orthop Res. 2015 ; 33 ( 3 ): 405 – 411 .

Perrotte JK , Baumann MR , Knight CF. Traditional gender roles and the stress-alcohol relationship among latina/o college students . Subst Use Misuse. 2018 ; 53 ( 10 ): 1700 – 1705 .

Din NU , Ukoumunne OC , Rubin G , et al. . Age and gender variations in cancer diagnostic intervals in 15 cancers: analysis of data from the UK clinical practice research datalink . PLoS One. 2015 ; 10 ( 5 ): e0127717 .

Maas AHEM , Appelman YEA. Gender differences in coronary heart disease . Neth Heart J. 2010 ; 18 ( 12 ): 598 – 603 .

Woodward M. Cardiovascular disease and the female disadvantage . Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 ; 16 ( 7 ): 1165 .

Samulowitz A , Gremyr I , Eriksson E , Hensing G. “Brave men” and “emotional women”: a theory-guided literature review on gender bias in health care and gendered norms towards patients with chronic pain . Pain Res Manag. 2018 ; 2018 : 6358624 .

Drogell K , Kincade B , Melaku M , Mangira C , Burns A , Krizo J. Race and sex are associated with variations in pain management in patients presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated abdominal pain . J Emerg Med. 2022 ; 63 ( 5 ): 629 – 635 .

Fleming PJ , Lee JG , Dworkin SL. “Real men don’t”: constructions of masculinity and inadvertent harm in public health interventions . Am J Public Health. 2014 ; 104 ( 6 ): 1029 – 1035 .

Griffith DM , Cornish EK. “What defines a man?”: perspectives of African American men on the components and consequences of manhood . Psychol Men Masculinity. 2018 ; 19 ( 1 ): 78 – 88 .

Griffith DM , Brinkley-Rubinstein L , Bruce MA , Thorpe RJ , Jr , Metzl JM. The interdependence of African American Men’s definitions of manhood and health . Fam Community Health. 2015 ; 38 ( 4 ): 284 – 296 .

American Psychological Association . APA Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men . Washington, DC : American Psychological Association ; 2018 .

Quam S , VanHook C , Szoko N , Passarello A , Miller E , Culyba AJ. Racial identity, masculinities, and violence exposure: perspectives from male adolescents in marginalized neighborhoods . J Adolesc Health. 2020 ; 67 ( 5 ): 638 – 644 .

Rinehart DJ , Al-Tayyib AA , Sionean C , Whitesell NR , Dreisbach S , Bull S. Assessing the theory of gender and power: HIV risk among heterosexual minority dyads . AIDS Behav. 2018 ; 22 ( 6 ): 1944 – 1954 .

Glick JL , Lim S , Beckham SW , Tomko C , Park JN , Sherman SG. Structural vulnerabilities and HIV risk among sexual minority female sex workers (SM-FSW) by identity and behavior in Baltimore, MD . Harm Reduct J. 2020 ; 17 ( 1 ): 43 .

Crear-Perry J , Correa-de-Araujo R , Lewis Johnson T , McLemore MR , Neilson E , Wallace M. Social and structural determinants of health inequities in maternal health . J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021 ; 30 ( 2 ): 230 – 235 .

Chinn JJ , Martin IK , Redmond N. Health equity among black women in the United States . J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021 ; 30 ( 2 ): 212 – 219 .

Milner A , Kavanagh A , Scovelle AJ , et al. . Gender equality and health in high-income countries: a systematic review of within-country indicators of gender equality in relation to health outcomes . Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2021 ; 2 ( 1 ): 113 – 123 .

King TL , Kavanagh A , Scovelle AJ , Milner A. Associations between gender equality and health: a systematic review . Health Promot Int. 2018 ; 35 ( 1 ): 27 – 41 .

Homan P. Structural sexism and health in the United States a new perspective on health inequality and the gender system . Am Sociol Rev. 2019 ; 84 ( 3 ): 486 – 516 .

Coffman M , Wilkinson E , Jabbarpour Y. Despite adequate training, only half of family physicians provide women’s health care services . J Am Board Fam Med. 2020 ; 33 ( 2 ): 186 – 188 .

Carnes M , Bartels CM , Kaatz A , Kolehmainen C. Why is John more likely to become department chair than Jennifer ? Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2015 ; 126 : 197 – 214 .

Pelley E , Carnes M. When a specialty becomes “women’s work”: trends in and implications of specialty gender segregation in medicine . Acad Med. 2020 ; 95 ( 10 ): 1499 .

Benoit MF , Ma JF , Upperman B. Comparison of 2015 Medicare relative value units for gender-specific procedures: gynecologic and gynecologic-oncologic versus urologic CPT coding. Has time healed gender-worth ? Gynecol Oncol. 2017 ; 144 ( 2 ): 336 – 342 .

Watson KL , King LP. Double discrimination, the pay gap in gynecologic surgery, and its association with quality of care . Obstet Gynecol. 2021 ; 137 ( 4 ): 657 – 661 .

Murrar S , Johnson PA , Lee YG , Carnes M. Research conducted in women was deemed more impactful but less publishable than the same research conducted in men . J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021 ; 30 ( 9 ): 1259 – 1267 .

As-Sanie S , Black R , Giudice LC , et al. . Assessing research gaps and unmet needs in endometriosis . Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 ; 221 ( 2 ): 86 – 94 .

Geller SE , Koch AR , Roesch P , Filut A , Hallgren E , Carnes M. The more things change, the more they stay the same: a study to evaluate compliance with inclusion and assessment of women and minorities in randomized controlled trials . Acad Med. 2018 ; 93 ( 4 ): 630 .

Feldman S , Ammar W , Lo K , Trepman E , van Zuylen M , Etzioni O. Quantifying sex bias in clinical studies at scale with automated data extraction . JAMA Netw Open. 2019 ; 2 ( 7 ): e196700 .

US Congress . National institutes of health revitalization act of 1993: act to amend the public health service act to revise and extend the programs of the national institutes of health, and for other purposes . Public Law. 1993 : 103 - 143 .

National Institutes of Health: Advancing Science for the Health of Women: The 2019–023 Trans-NIH Strategic Plan for Women’s Health Research . Bethesda, MD : National Institutes of Health , 2019 .

Noursi S , Clayton JA , Shieh CY , et al. . Developing the process and tracking the implementation and evaluation of the national institutes of health strategic plan for women’s health research . Glob Adv Health Med. 2021 ; 10 : 21649561211042583 . doi:10.1177/21649561211042583.

National Institutes of Health . NIH-wide strategic plan for fiscal years 2021–2025 . Bethesda, MD : National Institutes of Health ; 2021 .

Temkin SM , Noursi S , Regensteiner JG , Stratton P , Clayton JA. Perspectives from advancing national institutes of health research to inform and improve the health of women: a conference summary . Obstet Gynecol. 2022 ; 140 ( 1 ): 10 – 19 .

Griffith DM , Ellis KR , Allen JO. An intersectional approach to social determinants of stress for African American men: men’s and women’s perspectives . Am J Mens Health. 2013 ; 7 ( 4 Suppl ): 19S19s – 19S30S .

Richman LS , Zucker AN. Quantifying intersectionality: an important advancement for health inequality research . Soc Sci Med. 2019 ; 226 : 246 – 248 . doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.036.

Mirin AA. Gender disparity in the funding of diseases by the U.S. National Institutes of Health . J Women’s Health. 2021 ; 30 ( 7 ): 956 – 963 .

Ballreich JM , Gross CP , Powe NR , Anderson GF. Allocation of national institutes of health funding by disease category in 2008 and 2019 . JAMA Netw Open. 2021 ; 4 ( 1 ): e2034890e20348 – e2034890e290 .

Tadiri CP , Raparelli V , Abrahamowicz M , et al. ; GOINGFWD Consortium . Methods for prospectively incorporating gender into health sciences research . J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 ; 129 : 191 – 197 . doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.08.018.

Lindqvist A , Sendén MG , Renström EA. What is gender, anyway: a review of the options for operationalising gender . Psychol Sex. 2021 ; 12 ( 4 ): 332 – 344 .

Nielsen MW , Stefanick ML , Peragine D , et al. . Gender-related variables for health research . Biol Sex Differ. 2021 ; 12 ( 1 ): 23 .

Homan P , Brown TH , King B. Structural intersectionality as a new direction for health disparities research . J Health Soc Behav. 2021 ; 62 ( 3 ): 350 – 370 .

Clayton JA , Tannenbaum C. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research ? JAMA. 2016 ; 316 ( 18 ): 1863 – 1864 .

Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. BSSR Definition. https://obssr.od.nih.gov/about/bssr-definition . Accessed February 27, 2023.

Blachman-Demner DR , Tyus NC. Efforts to advance NIH-funded behavioral and social sciences research on structural racism and health . Transl Behav Med. 2022 ; 12 ( 7 ): 775 – 780 .

Collins FS , Adams AB , Aklin C , et al. ; NIH UNITE . Affirming NIH’s commitment to addressing structural racism in the biomedical research enterprise . Cell. 2021 ; 184 ( 12 ): 3075 – 3079 .

Stratton P , Gorodetsky E , Clayton J. Pregnant in the United States in the COVID-19 pandemic: a collision of crises we cannot ignore . J Natl Med Assoc. 2021 ; 113 ( 5 ): 499 - 503 .

Arnegard ME , Whitten LA , Hunter C , Clayton JA. Sex as a biological variable: a 5-year progress report and call to action . J Women’s Health. 2020 ; 29 ( 6 ): 858 – 864 .

Kantarci K , Morrow MM , Miller VM. Incorporating sex as a biological variable into clinical and translational research training . J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2020 ; 29 ( 6 ): 865 – 867 .

Clayton JA. Applying the new SABV (sex as a biological variable) policy to research and clinical care . Physiol Behav. 2018 ; 187 : 2 – 5 . doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.08.012.

White J , Tannenbaum C , Klinge I , Schiebinger L , Clayton J. The integration of sex and gender considerations into biomedical research: lessons from international funding agencies . J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021 ; 106 ( 10 ): 3034 – 3048 .

FY2022 data were incomplete at the time of the analysis, so Ns for FY2022 are partial.

Month:	Total Views:
April 2023	377
May 2023	184
June 2023	120
July 2023	132
August 2023	174
September 2023	258
October 2023	330
November 2023	391
December 2023	334
January 2024	639
February 2024	640
March 2024	729
April 2024	716
May 2024	778
June 2024	566
July 2024	342

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Recommend to Your Librarian
Advertising & Corporate Services

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1613-9860
Print ISSN 1869-6716
Copyright © 2024 Society of Behavioural Medicine
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Tools you might be interested in

Baby Growth Chart

What are Your Diaper Bag Essentials?

My Perfect Fit

Product Comparator

Boy or girl 33 old wives’ tales for predicting a baby’s gender.

You’ve likely heard a few old wives’ tales for gender predictions, like morning sickness as a sign you’re having a girl or a lower baby bump indicating a boy. If you’re ready to know the sex of your baby before they arrive, it can be hard to wait until that ultrasound! Though not based on science, these folktales and stories passed down by generations are fun ways to distract yourself while you wait. We’ve rounded up some of the most common, interesting, and just plain silly old wives’ tales for predicting your baby’s gender!

What’s an “Old Wives’ Tale”?

In today’s world, the phrase and idea of an “old wives’ tale” is certainly outdated, but the origins are quite interesting. “Wives” actually refers to women in general, as it comes from the English word wif and the German word weib , both meaning “women.” The idea is that older women passed down stories, myths, superstitions, legends, and the like to younger generations, with many of these legends existing for centuries before writing, print, and literacy became the norm.

Some of these tales are based on morality and were published as fairytales and fables, while others center on women’s health and related themes, including pregnancy, puberty, and nutrition, for example.

These stories are part of our culture and shared human history. Though medical advances have proved many wrong, it’s fun to learn about old wives’ tales for gender prediction—especially as a distraction if you’re always wondering, am I having a boy or girl?

Chinese Gender Predictor

Can't wait to know whether your little one's a boy or a girl try our fun tool, fill in your info to get started:.

This is a mandatory field.

Please select a due date!

Baby's Due Date*

How Do Old Wives’ Tales “Predict” Gender?

Many old wives’ tales were thought to “predict” gender, and you might have already heard of a few. Maybe someone has told you how the shape of your baby bump is a sign you’re having a boy or that your intense morning sickness means you’re having a girl. Of course, science has debunked these myths, but they’re still fun to hear!

So, no, old wives’ tales can’t really predict gender, but these legends were once the only way to try. Now we have a better shot at knowing the biological sex of a baby before birth, but if you haven’t quite made it to that ultrasound or just want to have a little fun, read on for some unscientific but entertaining ways to predict whether you’re having a girl or boy!

Old Wives’ Tales Gender Prediction: Pregnancy Symptoms

Many old wives’ tales for gender prediction center on typical early pregnancy symptoms or those symptoms you feel in your second or third trimesters. According to these stories and myths, morning sickness, cravings, heartburn, and even your blood pressure levels may reveal the gender of your baby!

1. Cravings

If you’re experiencing pregnancy cravings , pay attention to what you want to eat. This old wives’ tale suggests that having salty vs. sweet cravings can predict gender.

Girl: Food cravings when pregnant with a girl consist of sweet things like chocolate, pastries, juice, and fruit.

Boy: Food cravings when pregnant with a boy tend to be saltier or savory items, such as meat, cheese, and other forms of protein.

The Reality

Food cravings may be linked to hormonal surges or to changes in the way the body absorbs nutrients during pregnancy. But there’s really no rhyme or reason behind specific food cravings, which tend to be very individual!

2. Heartburn

Heartburn is another common pregnancy symptom. Though having heartburn isn't the most comfortable experience, this old wives’ tale puts a spin on it to predict your baby’s gender.

Girl: Constant or more intense heartburn is a sign you’re having a girl—and that she’llbe born with a full head of hair!

Boy: If you don’t experience much heartburn, that’s a sign you’re having a boy.

This is another symptom linked to pregnancy hormones , which affect whether you experience heartburn. These hormones prompt your body to slow digestion and absorb nutrients better. Plus, pressure from your growing uterus on your stomach might also cause heartburn.

3. Morning Sickness

A well-known old wives’ tales for gender prediction relates to morning sickness , more officially known as nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP). This is a fairly common symptom, though it doesn’t affect everyone. Will you have more nausea with a boy or girl? Let’s find out!

Girl: If you’re experiencing a lot of morning sickness and feel ill, you’re having a girl.

Boy: If you don’t have any morning sickness or just mild nausea, it’s a boy.

Of course, this is still just a fun old wives’ tale that tries to predict gender. However, a few studies have shown an association between experiencing severe morning sickness, called hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) ,and a greater likelihood of giving birth to a girl.

Medical experts haven’t pinpointed the exact cause of morning sickness, but many link it to higher levels of the “pregnancy hormone,” hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin ), and estrogen.

4. Linea Nigra Length

Yes, even the linea nigra plays a role in gender prediction according to this old wives’ tale! The linea nigra is a dark line on your abdomen that appears during pregnancy and stretches down your belly bump to your pubic bone. Once yours starts to appear, take a closer look.

Girl: You’re welcoming a baby girl if your linea nigra starts below your belly button.

Boy: If the linea nigra starts above your belly bottom, it’s a boy.

You guessed it—pregnancy hormones may trigger skin changes, including the appearance of the linea nigra. These hormones stimulate melanin production, which can also cause other pigmentation. The way the linea nigra looks isn’t a gender prediction but reflects an increase in melanin.

5. Hair and Nails

If you’re blessed with that rumored pregnancy glow, you might notice that your hair and nails look extra healthy. Not everyone experiences this, but as the old wives’ tale goes, these changes predict your baby’s gender.

Girl: If you notice your hair and nails feel brittle, dry, and thin, hello, baby girl!

Boy: If you have shiny, luscious, and healthy hair and nails, welcome to the world, baby boy!

If you do experience that pregnancy glow, you can thank your hormones and increased blood flow. As a result, your skin may look plumper and smoother, and your hair a little shinier and stronger.

Pregnancy glow is one thing, but you might notice a different skin condition and start to develop acne. And, of course, there’s an old wives’ tale linking acne during pregnancy to whether you’re having a boy or girl!

Girl: So, if you have oily skin while pregnant, is it a boy or girl? Yep, those pimples are a sign you’re having a girl!

Boy: On the other hand, no extra pimples and dry skin during pregnancy mean it’s a boy!

More hormones during pregnancy mean more sebum production, sebum being the oil in skin that's linked to acne. So, hormones might cause extra pimples on your face during pregnancy, regardless of whether you’re having a boy or girl.

7. Pregnancy Brain

Have you heard of “ pregnancy brain ?” This catchall term covers those typical pregnancy symptoms that you associate with your brain, such as forgetfulness, brain fog, fatigue, and clumsiness. So, does feeling sleepy and clumsy while pregnant mean a boy or girl? This old wives’ tale has the answer!

Girl: If you’re fairly alert and steady on your feet while pregnant, hello, baby girl.

Boy: Feeling tired and a little clumsy is a sign you’re having a boy.

Medical experts have yet to confirm if “pregnancy brain” is a true condition, but there’s no doubt that many experience these symptoms while pregnant. Though studies show slight changes in the brain during pregnancy, conditions such as clumsiness, forgetfulness, and general spaciness probably have more to do with hormone fluctuations, fatigue, stress, and the like.

Old Wives’ Tales Gender Prediction: Body Changes

Other old wives’ tales look at body changes—both yours and your developing baby’s—to predict genders. So, keep an eye on the size of your adorable belly bump and pay attention to changes in your breasts and your baby’s heart rate.

8. Baby Bump Position

Possibly the most well-known old wives’ tale for gender prediction is the one based on how you carry your baby. So, if you’re wondering, am I having a boy or girl, take a look at that baby bump once it starts to show.

Girl: If you’re carrying high, as in your baby bump sits higher on your belly, it’s a sign you’re having a girl.

Boy: If you carry lower in your abdomen, closer to your pelvic bone, it’s a little baby boy.

Your baby bump position is related to the size and positioning of your uterus. In early pregnancy, your uterus will sit lower in your abdomen; as the uterus starts to expand, it’ll sit higher and more forward. The size of your baby might also impact the positioning of your bump.

9. Baby Bump Shape

Not only the positioning but the shape of your baby bump can indicate gender, according to legend. So, boy belly vs. girl belly? This old wives’ tale knows all!

Girl: A wide baby bump is a sign you’re having a girl.

Boy: If your bump looks narrow and pops forward, as if you have a basketball under your shirt, it’s a boy!

The shape of your belly bump is related to your baby’s positioning inside your uterus. Babies that snuggle sideways will cause a wider bump, for example.

10. Feet Changes

This gender myth concerns your feet. Pregnancy produces many changes in your body, among them swollen feet . Girl or boy? Let’s find out!

Girl: If your feet stay the same without any swelling, hooray, it’s a girl!

Boy: If you notice swelling in your feet, get ready to welcome a boy.

Swelling is very common in pregnancy and can occur in the ankles, legs, and feet. It’s caused by extra fluid and pressure from a growing uterus.

11. Breast Size

As your body prepares for your baby, you’ll likely notice changes in your breasts . Pay attention to how they develop, as this old wives’ tale believes they’re sending you a gender prediction message.

Girl: If your breasts get fuller but remain in proportion to your body shape, it’s a girl.

Boy: If your breasts become very large and heavy, especially in contrast to your body shape, you’re having a boy.

Breasts grow and change throughout pregnancy. Early on, hormones like estrogen and progesterone will cause your breasts to grow, and later, they’ll continue to change as you start producing milk.

12. Changes to Nipples

Along with increased fullness in your breasts, changes in your nipples are common when you're pregnant. Do these changes mean a boy or girl? This old wives’ tale has some ideas.

Girl: If the color of the areola (the area surrounding the nipple) stays about the same, say hello to your baby girl.

Boy: If the areola becomes darker in color, welcome to the world, sweet baby boy.

Excess hormones can cause hyperpigmentation in various areas of your body, including your nipples. This extra melanin could cause your areolae to darken.

13. Urine Color

Yes, even the color of urine when pregnant with a boy or girl can inspire old wives’ tales! Pay attention to the color to predict your little one’s gender.

Girl: If your urine is darker or a normal shade of yellow, you’re having a girl.

Boy: If your urine is brighter, it’s a sign you’re having a boy.

When you're pregnant with a boy or girl, the color of your urine isn't affected by the gender of your baby. Rather, it stems from what you eat, drink, and ingest. Color changes can be triggered by certain foods or by your fluid intake; taking prenatal vitamins can also impact the hue you see when you pee.

14. Weight Gain

Pregnancy weight gain is normal and a must when supporting a developing baby. But do you gain more weight with a boy or girl? This old wives’ tale has the answer.

Girl: Where do you gain weight when pregnant with a girl? If the extra pounds appear throughout your body, especially in your bottom and thighs, it’s a girl.

Boy: If most of your weight gain happens in your belly, it’s a boy.

Pregnancy weight gain is very individual and has more to do with your body type, pre-pregnancy weight, and history of weight gain.

15. Partner’s Weight Gain

If you think you and your partner are linked in mind, body, heart, and soul, this old wives’ tale for gender prediction might be the one for you! According to this legend, it’s not just about your pregnancy weight gain, but your partner’s too!

Girl: If your partner gains weight while you’re pregnant, it’s a sign you’re having a girl.

Boy: If your partner’s weight stays about the same, it’s a boy.

Obviously, what happens in your partner’s body has nothing to do with your pregnancy, but they might be experiencing couvade syndrome . This is when a pregnant person’s partner feels the symptoms of pregnancy.

16. Baby’s Heartbeat

It’s thrilling to hear the swoosh of your baby’s heartbeat at your prenatal appointments. And according to this old wives’ tale, your baby’s heart rate can predict their gender!

Girl: If your baby’s fetal heart rate is above 140 beats per minute (bpm), you're having a girl.

Boy: If your baby’s heartbeat is less than 140 bpm, then it’s a sign you’re having a boy.

A normal heart rate for a fetus ranges from 110 to 160 bpm, and other factors like gestational age and your baby’s activity level may affect it.

17. Sleeping Sides

Sleeping while pregnant can be quite the challenge, so you’ll want to listen to your body and make yourself as comfortable as possible. But does your preferred side predict your baby’s gender? It does, at least according to this old wives’ tale!

Girl: If you naturally fall asleep on your right side, hello, baby girl.

Boy: If you fall asleep on your left side, it’s a boy!

You’ll need extra sleep when pregnant, which isn’t always easy to manage as your belly bump grows! Choose the side that feels most comfortable, which could change throughout the night. Just remember that side-sleeping is best, as sleeping on your back while pregnant can put pressure on your spine and back muscles and/or compress a major blood vessel.

18. Blood Pressure

If you're interested in this gender myth, think back to the last appointment with your healthcare provider before you became pregnant. If you can access your records, look for your blood pressure.

Girl: If you had higher blood pressure before you became pregnant, get ready for a girl.

Boy: If your blood pressure didn’t change before getting pregnant, it’s a baby boy.

High blood pressure outside of pregnancy can mean a lot of things, but revealing your future baby’s gender isn’t one of them. It’s best to talk with your healthcare provider if you have any concerns about blood pressure at any time in your life.

Old Wives’ Tales Gender Prediction: Methods

In addition to looking at pregnancy symptoms and body changes, there are other gender prediction methods you could try. You could take your chance on one of the most popular methods, the Chinese gender prediction chart, or give the legendary Mayan gender prediction a shot.

Unlike the gender predictions above, most of the following aren't accompanied by medical facts to set you straight, as these methods are totally for fun!

19. Ramzi Method

This old wives’ tale to predict gender has a more modern approach, as it relies upon ultrasound technology. When you have an ultrasound, ask your healthcare provider to help determine on which side of the uterus your baby decided to attach themselves.

Girl: If your baby attaches to the right side of the uterus, she’s a sweet little girl.

Boy: If your baby chooses the left side of your uterus to attach to, hello, baby boy.

20. Nub Theory

The nub theory is another one that depends upon an ultrasound. Ask your healthcare provider to point out your baby’s genital tubercle, where you can see the genital nub (this can usually be detected starting at about 12 weeks). This old wives’ tale predicts gender by looking at the angle of the genital nub, which can provide some basis for an informed guess but is not 100 percent accurate.

Girl: For girls, the genital nub usually lays parallel or angled less than 30 degrees from the spine.

Boy: For boys, the nub typically angles higher than 30 degrees from the spine.

21. Skull Theory

Yet another gender prediction requiring an ultrasound, the skull theory focuses on the shape of your baby’s developing skull. Ask your healthcare provider to show you your little one’s skull to see if it appears rounded or blocky.

Girl: If your baby has a rounded skull, she’ll be a little girl.

Boy: If your baby’s skull isn’t quite as rounded, you’re having a boy.

22. Mayan System

A truly ancient method inspiring an old wives’ tale, the Mayan system of gender prediction uses the parent’s birthday. The Mayans would look at the year of the mother’s birth and the year the baby is due to formulate a gender prediction.

Girl: If both years are even or odd, prepare for a girl.

Boy: If one year is even and the other odd, you’re having a boy.

23. Chinese Gender Prediction

One of the most popular gender prediction methods involves using the Chinese Gender Prediction Chart . You’ll use a chart to plot the mother’s age at conception and the baby’s month of conception.

Girl: If on the chart the mother’s age and conception month intersect to indicate a girl, you’ll see something that indicates that gender, like the word “girl” or a shade of pink.

Boy: If the chart indicates a boy, it might say “boy” or be a shade of blue.

Old Wives’ Tales Gender Prediction: Tests

How to predict a baby’s gender? Besides the gender myths above, other stories and traditions use a simple test to reveal if you’re having a boy or girl. From eating garlic to the classic wedding ring gender test, these old wives’ tales are all just for fun and don’t come with any revealing truths. Enjoy!

24. Baking Soda Test

This fairly simple test involves peeing in a cup (and you thought you were done with that after taking a pregnancy test !). All you need to do is pee into a cup and add two tablespoons of baking soda.

Girl: If you’re having a girl, the mixture will stay flat.

Boy: If you’re having a boy, the mixture will fizz.

25. Wedding Ring Gender Test

For this old wives’ tale gender prediction test, you need a strand of your hair and your wedding ring (or a favorite ring you wear regularly). Ask one of your friends to hold the ring dangling from your strand of hair over your belly, keeping it steady. After it’s steady, notice how it starts to move!

Girl: If the ring moves in circles, it’s a sign you’re having a girl.

Boy: If you’re having a boy, the ring will move from side to side.

26. Pencil Test

This old wives’ tale is similar to the hair and ring test, but it goes a little further to predict the gender of all your children, whether you’re currently pregnant or not. You’ll tie a string to the top of a very sharp pencil. Ask a friend to dangle the string with the pencil lead pointing down and over your wrist (either wrist will do), arm flat on a surface, and palm facing up. It’ll take a moment for the pencil to steady, but once it does, it’ll start to sway. Watch for the rhythm.

Girl: If the pencil moves side to side across your wrist, it indicates a girl.

Boy: If the pencil moves up and down over the length of your arm, it means a boy.

What makes this old wives’ tale even more fun is that the pencil will center itself and change its pattern for each child, revealing and/or predicting the gender of all your children, past and future. For example, if the pencil first moves side to side, then centers itself, then moves side to side again and recenters, then moves up and down before stopping completely, it indicates that you will have (or currently have) two girls and one boy, in that order.

27. Eye Test

This old wives’ tale presents an easy way to predict your baby’s gender. All you need to do is look at your reflection in a mirror and focus on your pupils, watching for any changes.

Girl: If your pupils remain the same, hello, baby girl.

Boy: If your pupils start dilating (get bigger), you’re having a boy.

28. Garlic Test

Hmmm, how to tell what gender you’re having? To check out this gender myth, you’ll probably need to love (or at least tolerate) the taste and smell of garlic. Here's what to do: eat a few cloves of raw garlic and wait an hour or so.

Girl: If you don’t smell of garlic after eating it, it’s a sign you’re having a girl.

Boy: If you smell like garlic, it's a boy, especially if it sweats out through your pores.

29. Baby Hair Test

This old wives’ tale gender test works if your new baby has an older sibling. You’ll need to wash your youngest child’s hair, comb it, let it air dry, and look for the cowlick on the back of their head.

Girl: If your youngest child’s hair naturally swirls clockwise away from the head, the next baby will be a girl.

Boy: If their hair naturally swirls counterclockwise, the next baby will be a boy.

30. Drain Cleaner Test

This old wives’ tale isn’t all that old since it involves liquid drain cleaner, which wasn’t around during your great-great-grandmother’s time. This test mixes your urine with liquid drain cleaner to put a classic spin on it. Yes, it’s a little weird, but it made the list!

Girl: If the mixture turns green, congratulations, it’s a girl!

Boy: According to this myth, the color of urine when pregnant with boy is blue!

31. Red Cabbage Test

If you didn’t think combining your urine with drain cleaner was strange enough, try mixing it with cabbage water. Chop a head of red cabbage and put it in a bowl. Pour boiling hot water over it and wait 10 minutes. Strain the water equally into two glass containers and mix equal parts of your urine into it.

Girl: You’re having a girl if the water turns violet.

Boy: It’s a boy if the water turns red or pink.

Signs You’re Having a Boy vs. Girl: Involve Your Partner!

Of course, you can involve your partner in any or all of the silly old wives’ tales above, but here are a few methods that require your partner's participation to predict your baby’s gender.

32. Key Test

If you want to involve your partner in an old wives’ tale gender predictor, don’t read the results of this one yet! Just have your partner place a key on the table. Pick up the key and ask your partner to read the results below—serious spoilers ahead, so no peeking!

Girl: If you pick the key up by its narrow end, it’s a girl!

Boy: If you pick the key up by its rounded top, welcome to the world, baby boy!

33. Fork or Spoon Test

You’ll need a fork, spoon, and two chairs for this one. Ask your partner to tape a spoon under the seat of one chair and a fork under the seat of the other. Without knowing which chair has which utensil under it, pick a seat!

Girl: If you choose the seat with the spoon, you’re having a girl.

Boy: If you chose the seat with the fork, it’s a baby boy.

Still, an ultrasound is your best bet. Let your provider know beforehand if you’d like to learn your baby’s sex (so they don’t forget or reveal it to you if you don’t want to know)!

When Can an Ultrasound Show Your Baby’s Sex?

Am I having a boy or girl is an exciting question to ponder during your pregnancy journey. For many, the mid-pregnancy ultrasound at about 18 to 20 weeks reveals the big news. Waiting this long can be tough if you're super eager to know if it’s a boy or girl!

Using old wives’ tales to predict your baby’s gender is a fun and silly way to distract yourself while you wait, but, of course, these aren’t accurate, medical, or scientific. However, ultrasounds can also be misinterpreted, so there’s truly no completely accurate gender predictor.

The Bottom Line

Am I having a girl or boy? Learning the sex of your baby is an exciting pregnancy milestone, so, understandably, you're eager for that ultrasound! To keep your mind occupied while you wait, have fun with some of these old wives’ tales to predict your baby’s gender. Though a unique part of our history and storytelling traditions, these gender myths are now just for fun and entertainment. Enjoy them! One thing that’s definitely not a myth is how many diapers a baby uses , which might surprise you! Reward yourself for those diapers and wipes purchases by downloading the Pampers Club app —the perks you’ll earn are the real deal, not an old wives’ tale.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Your Pregnancy and Childbirth: Month to Month, 6th ed. (Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2015).
Mayo Clinic. Guide to a Healthy Pregnancy, 2nd ed. (Rochester, MN: Mayo Clinic Press, 2018).
Cleveland Clinic. “Prenatal Ultrasonography”
Cleveland Clinic. “Urine Changes”
KidsHealth. “12 Weeks”
KidsHealth. “Can Pregnant Women Do Anything to Reduce or Prevent Swollen Ankles?”
Mayo Clinic. “What's the Best Way to Treat Pregnancy Acne?”
Mayo Clinic. “Does ‘Baby Brain’ Really Exist?”
Mayo Clinic. “Fetal Presentation Before Birth”
Mayo Clinic. “Second Trimester Pregnancy”
Mayo Clinic. “How to Use a Fetal Heart Rate Monitor”
National Library of Medicine. “Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy”
National Library of Medicine. “Couvade Syndrome Among Polish Expectant Fathers”
Women’s Health. “Body Changes and Discomforts”
Women’s Health. “Staying Healthy and Safe”

As an Executive Editor, Madeline oversaw health, development, and parenting content for the Pampers brand and Pampers.com. She worked closely with editorial teams and medical experts around the globe to ensure that new and expectant parents received ...

Review this article:

Checklist for This Month

Where You Already Belong

Search Please fill out this field.
Newsletters
Sweepstakes
Pregnancy Health

20 Myths About Predicting a Baby's Sex

Are you having a boy or a girl? These old wives' tales during pregnancy can be a fun way to guess your baby's sex, but it's worth keeping in mind a few things.

Old wives' tales are little more than super-circulated rumors. Sometimes, they're sayings and adages that generations have passed down regarding family health such as "eating carrots improves your vision," or safe parenting ones like "wait an hour after eating before swimming," and of course pregnancy sayings like "getting food cravings for salty snacks means you're pregnant with a boy."

If you're trying to guess your baby's sex , those types of myths can be a fun way to pass the time, but it's worth keeping in mind that there's not really any science to back them up. Ahead, find some classic old wives' tales regarding predicting the sex of your baby.

Editor's Note

While this article uses the terms "gender" and "boy" vs. "girl," it's important to note that gender is a personal identity that exists on a spectrum, can change over the course of a person's lifetime—and most importantly—is something that a person defines for themselves. Sex, on the other hand, is assigned at birth based on the appearance of a baby's genitalia. While sex assigned at birth often matches a person's gender (called cisgender), sometimes, for transgender, intersex, and gender nonbinary people, it does not.

Popular Baby Gender Predictors

Sleep position.

Pay attention to your sleep position at night. If you prefer sleeping on your left side, you're supposedly having a boy. Right side? This old wive's tale says you're pregnant with a girl.

Upset Stomach

Although it's not clear why, some research might support the myth that if you experience extreme morning sickness, you're having a girl.

For example, in a 2021 study of 4,320 pregnancies, those carrying a female fetus reported a significantly higher frequency of nausea during the first trimester than those who were pregnant with males.

Soft or Dry Hands

As the old wives' tale goes, you might have a boy if your hands are dry during pregnancy. But, on the other hand, soft hands are mythically linked with girls.

Food Cravings

According to lore, your favorite pregnancy food cravings may indicate if you're pregnant with a boy or a girl. Supposedly, if your pregnancy cravings involve potato chips, pretzels, popcorn, or other salty foods, you're more likely to be pregnant with a boy.

If you are more likely to have a desire for ice cream, chocolate, and candy, however, those sweet cravings are associated with having a girl. Citrus cravings have also been associated with girls. However, it's important to note that food cravings often cover a wide range, with sweets, high-fat foods, and fast food being among the most common.

Are pregnancy hormones making your skin break out ? If so, the old wives' tale says you might be expecting a girl. However, the reality is that many people have acne during pregnancy due to changing hormone levels, no matter their baby's sex.

Graceful or Clumsy Pregnancy

If you feel as though you're gliding through the day, rumor has it you're having a girl. Stumbling around? It just might be a boy says this myth.

Face Weight Gain

If your face gets fuller during pregnancy, a girl might be on the way. That said, everyone experiences weight distribution differently, so it may have more to do with your body than your baby's sex.

Also, if you experience extreme sudden puffiness in your face, talk to a health care provider, since this can be a symptom of preeclampsia .

Mood Changes

Mood swings are common during pregnancy. Legend has it that if you're constantly switching between happiness and sadness and anger—and every other mood in between—you might expect a baby girl to join your family. However, like other items on this list, it's best not to read into this one too much.

Mood swings affect lots of pregnant people, and are typically caused by changes in hormones, fatigue, or physical stress. But if you find that your mood swings are frequent, intense, or reflect symptoms of depression, consult a health care provider for further assistance.

High or Low Pregnant Belly

As it turns out, old wives' tales for pregnancy bellies also exist. They say if you're carrying the baby low on your stomach, a baby boy might be in your future. If it's high, you're supposedly having a girl.

Pendulum Test

This myth about gender prediction might seem strange, but it's all in good fun. Dangle a chain with a pendulum (or charm or ring) over your belly. If it swings back and forth, the myth says you've got a boy; if it swings in a circle, you might have a girl.

Hand Display

"Show me your hands." Hold out your hand as your normally would in response to this question. A palms-up position means you're having a girl, while hands-down could indicate a boy.

How You Carry Your Weight

Tune into how you carry your pregnancy weight. Those who carry their baby in front might expect a boy, while weight spaced more evenly around your middle could indicate a girl.

Oddly, science has found a connection between gestational weight gain and fetal sex. For example, a 2014 study published in PLOS One analyzed 68 million births over 23 years and found that those who gained more weight were statistically more likely to give birth to a boy.

Toddler Advice

You'll need a little boy for this one, whether it's your own son , a nephew, or a friend's child. The old wives' tale says if the boy is interested in your belly, it's a girl; if he ignores your belly, it's a boy.

Eating Garlic

Some say you can guess your baby's sex by eating garlic—who knew? If the smell seeps out of your pores, rumor says you're having a boy. If there's no scent, it's a girl.

Holding a Key

Grab the nearest house key or car key. Did you pick it up by the round end? The old wives' tales say you're expecting a boy. But, on the other hand, picking it by the long end means you might give birth to a girl.

Even and Odd Numbers

As the old tale goes, if your age and year of conception are both even numbers—or both odd numbers—a girl is on the way. One even and one odd number indicates a boy.

Baby's Heartbeat

Listen to your little one's heartbeat . You're supposedly pregnant with a girl if you detect more than 150 beats per minute. Hearing less than 150 beats per minute points to a boy.

Stress Test

According to old wives' tales for gender prediction , a child tends to be the same sex as the parent who is less stressed at the time of conception . (Of course, this tale presumes a heteronormative baby-making experience and doesn't account for fertility assistance or same-sex parents.)

Pregnancy Dreams

This old wives' tale might be a little surprising! If you dream about having a girl while pregnant, you might wind up having a boy—and vice versa.

Breast Size

Take a good look at your pregnancy breasts . If your right breast is larger than the left one, it could mean you're growing a girl. If the left breast is larger, it could be a baby boy.

The Bottom Line

At the end of the day, it may be fun to try to guess your baby's sex with these myths, but none of them hold scientific weight.

If you're curious about the sex of your fetus, the only evidence-based ways to determine it before birth is through ultrasound or noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) . But, even then, these techniques are not 100% accurate. For example, sometimes genitals are not clear during an ultrasound because of your baby's position. In rare cases, your baby may be intersex (a person whose reproductive and sexual anatomy does not neatly fit into typical male or female categories).

So, while games for speculation or more scientific approaches like scans might be fun to learn which genitalia your child might be born with, remember that gender is an identity and can be fluid . As a result, your child may not identify with the sex they were assigned at birth. So, try not to get too attached to predictions about their gender.

Does greater morning sickness predict carrying a girl? Analysis of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy from retrospective report . Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2021.

Pickles and ice cream! Food cravings in pregnancy: hypotheses, preliminary evidence, and directions for future research . Front Psychol. 2014.

Skin Conditions During Pregnancy . ACOG . 2021.

Signs and Symptoms of Preeclampsia . Preeclampsia Foundation . 2022.

Mood Swings During Pregnancy . American Pregnancy Association. 2020.

Low gestational weight gain skews human sex ratios towards females . PLoS ONE . 2014.

Learn /

Posterior Placenta : Here’s All You Need To Know

5 Dec 2017 | 7 min Read

The front wall of the uterus is called anterior, and the back wall is known as posterior. When the placenta is placed in the back portion of the uterus, it is called as a placenta posterior. This occurs when the fertilized egg travels via the fallopian tubes and attaches itself to the back wall of the uterus. This is where the placenta begins to grow.

What does Posterior Placenta means?

Placenta a vital organ as it provides nourishment and oxygen to the baby and carries away waste materials. In addition to that, the placenta also helps protect the baby from infections and produces hormones that stimulate the smooth progress of pregnancy and childbirth.

Posterior placenta means the placenta has gotten tethered to the back wall of the uterus and is closest to the spine.

How the placenta positions itself into the wall of the uterus is vital, as that will determine the method of childbirth, either vaginal or cesarean. It will also help to understand the growth and development of your baby.

This can be detected via an anomaly ultrasound conducted during the initial weeks of pregnancy.

The placenta usually develops where the fertilized egg is embedded. Apart from the posterior position, the placenta can have anterior and low-lying positions. In the anterior, the placenta attaches to the front wall of the uterus.

The low-lying placenta is a condition where the placenta attaches to the lower section of the uterus causing a pregnancy-related condition called placenta previa .

Posterior placenta basically means that the placenta has attached to the posterior wall of the uterus. In this condition, women may feel stronger movements, motions, and kicks from the baby, right from the early stages of pregnancy .

A placenta posterior might even be better for the baby as it helps the baby grow and align itself properly in the birth canal before labor, thus favoring a vaginal birth .

How Does Posterior Placenta Affect Pregnancy?

Posterior placental complications have been rarely observed. However, it could affect your pregnancy in the following ways:

It can make your cervix difficult to dilate during childbirth
This positioning could lead to preterm labor
In some cases, it involves the risk of miscarrying
It could lead to pregnancy-induced hypertension and the development of gestational diabetes.

However, be rest assured that the posterior placenta will not affect the growth and development of your baby. It will not make any difference to the foetus as long as it is cushioned in the placenta.

What Are The Risks of Posterior Placenta?

A posterior placenta might not cause severe complications during pregnancy. However, you may experience some complications during labor or delivery.

A low-lying posterior placenta may increase the chances of a condition called placenta previa , which might partly or wholly block the cervix, leading to a C-section delivery .
In some cases, the placental position can make incisions during C-sections more difficult. It could lead to heavy bleeding during delivery.
The posterior placenta also involves the risk of excess bleeding during vaginal delivery too.
Women with the posterior placental location may experience severe back pain during labor which could make the delivery process even more painful.
In some cases, this condition could also lead to placental abruption as well.

Although the risk to the mother and child could be rare, it’s always a good decision to consult your doctor beforehand and discuss your condition beforehand to avoid these complications.

The following symptoms might indicate a placental issue. If you experience any of them, we suggest you contact your doctor immediately. Signs of placental issues include:

Vaginal bleeding
Abdominal pain
Uterine contractions
Severe back pain

Also, if you suffer an impact on your belly during a fall or trauma, get your injuries checked by your doctor immediately. Any injury suffered might affect your placental health and may require a thorough medical examination.

Things to Know About Placental Grading

Placental grading or Grannum classification is the categorisation of the ultrasonographic morphology of the placenta, based on its maturity. It determines the extent of calcification with the gestational age.

The placenta is grouped into four grades, namely grades 0 to three.

Here, the gestational age is less than 18 weeks, i.e., between the late first trimester and early second trimester.
The placental substance is a uniform echotexture without echogenic areas
There are no base layer echogenicities
The chorionic plate is smooth, well-defined, and has an unbroken dense line.
Here, the gestational age is between 18-29 weeks, roughly mid-second trimester to early third trimester
The chorionic plate is a well-defined unbroken line, but with fine undulations.
This grade is considered the early stage of placenta maturation.
The placental substance may contain a few echogenic areas that are randomly scattered.
Here, the gestational age is beyond 30 weeks, i.e., late third trimester
The placental substance has linear echogenic densities which are incompletely divided.
Larger configurations are present in the basilar plate.
The chorionic plate has more marked indentations.
The gestational week is beyond 39 weeks.
The placenta is fully matured and the chorionic plate has complete indentations.
The basal layer is dense and bigger
The placental substance is divided into compartments that demarcate the cotyledons.

Calcification is considered healthy and normal. However, there are chances of premature calcification in case of underlying conditions such as placenta previa, diabetes or hypertension in pregnancy .

Next, we will answer some frequently asked questions about posterior placenta.

Is it good to have posterior placenta?

The placenta can attach and grow anywhere within the walls of the uterus. Having either an anterior or posterior placenta is normal as long as it does not affect the growth and development of the baby.

Does posterior placenta mean boy or girl?

Some studies suggest that this condition could lead to giving birth to a baby boy. But more studies are required to back this claim.

Can you feel the baby moves more with posterior placenta?

Yes. Since the placenta is attached to the back wall of the uterine, mums may experience stronger movements and kicks.

Can posterior placenta cause back pain?

In some cases, posterior placenta can cause back pain during labor.

Some Myths About Posterior Placenta

Myth 1: Posterior placenta heightens fetal movement

Certain studies suggest that in this condition, mothers may feel stronger kicks and movements from the early stages of their pregnancy. However, there isn’t enough evidence to back this claim.

Myth 2: Posterior placenta is the best placental position

According to studies, there is no ‘best’ placental position. But, posterior placental positioning is considered one of the ideal positions as it allows the baby to move to the vaginal canal easily.

Myth 3: Posterior placenta can determine the gender of the baby

There isn’t enough scientific evidence to validate this claim. However, a few studies do indicate a relation between placental position and the gender of the baby.

Myth 4: Posterior placenta may impact the chances of a normal delivery

As long as your placenta isn’t covering the cervix, you can have a vaginal birth.

Myth 5: posterior placenta can cause preterm labor

There isn’t enough study to validate this claim.

Conclusion:

Posterior placenta isn’t a matter of concern. Any risk arising due to this condition can be managed if diagnosed timely during ultrasound scans. All you need to do is follow your doctor’s suggestions and keep stress at bay.

Disclaimer: The information in the article is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of your doctor.

Gender in Childhood Goes Beyond Pink or Blue

Christia Spears Brown

16 March 2021 Last update: 17/03/21 12:05

When people think about gender in children, the focus is often around differences between girls and boys. But most modern research on gender development highlights how this focus overlooks two important themes: boys and girls, at the group level, are much more similar to one another than they are different, and there is so much variation within gender groups that those comparisons are flawed to begin with.

First, based on large scale meta-analyses across domains of cognitive abilities, communication, personality and social variables, psychological well-being, and motor behaviors, the research is very clear that gender differences are usually either very small or non-existent. Indeed, 78% of all the effect sizes examined in meta-analyses indicated either no or very small differences between boys and girls (Hyde, 2005). Are there reliable differences between boys and girls? There are, but typically only in the domains of motor performance (such as throwing distance and velocity), some measures of sexuality (such as frequency of masturbation), and physical aggression. This is consistent with what neuroscience shows, which confirms that women’s and men’s brains are not sexually dimorphic (either female or male); instead, women’s and men’s brain structures are actually more similar to each other than they are different (Joel et al., 2015). There is no such thing as a binary, prototypical female or prototypical male brain.

Not only does a focus on gender differences between boys and girls search for differences that rarely appear, that approach also ignores the diversity within gender groups. For example, there is variation among children who are identified as male or female at birth, in that they may identify as a cisgender boy or girl, a transgender boy or girl, non-binary, gender nonconforming, gender expansive, genderqueer, or gender diverse. When teens were asked “Do you consider yourself transgender, genderqueer, genderfluid, or unsure about your gender identity?,” about 3% of 9th and 11th graders selected a non-binary option (Rider, et al., 2016). There is also biological variability within cisgender girls and boys; for example, girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) have hormone exposure more similar to males in utero than females. Thus, comparing “boys” to “girls” ignores all of the children who don’t neatly fit into a rigid binary.

There is also enormous diversity across cultures, both in terms of how girls and boys are treated, and at times, in how gender is even defined. For example, in many parts of the world, parents exhibit strong preferences for sons over daughters, often reflecting the sons’ roles as future financial providers for the family. In other parts of the world (such as Sweden), national preschool curricula have been specifically designed to counteract traditional gender stereotypes, gender roles, and gender patterns. And yet, in some regions around the world, there are also cultural differences in the basic conceptions of gender and accepted gender identities (such as a non-binary category of individuals, called hijras, in India; and fa’afafine in Independent Samoa).

Taken together, research consistently shows that gender is extremely diverse, multi-faceted, and culturally dependent. As parents, policymakers, and researchers think about how children develop within their gender, we need to ensure that our conceptions of gender reflect this rich complexity.

Cambridge Elements
child development
Elements in Child Development
gender stereotypes
gender studies
Gender Symbolism

Where Physical and Digital Worlds Collide

In this blog for Data-Centric Engineering, Paul Clarke (Chief Technology Officer at Ocado) documents Ocado’s journey with building synthetic models of its business, its platforms and its underlying technologies, including the use of simulations, emulations, visualisations and digital twins. He explores the potential benefits of digital twins, including the opportunities for creating digital twins at […]

Jesse Lund and more · 6 March 2020

International Women’s Day 2020: Influential women in STEM

International Women’s Day 2020 falls on Sunday, 8th March this year. In the run up to this date, each week day we’ll be highlighting one woman whose accomplishments in science, technology, engineering and/or mathematics not only elevated their fields but also took us one step closer to a gender-equal world. We hope you’ll join us […]

Thomas R Trautmann · 29 November 2021

Elephants, Kings, and Comparison, a Conversation with Tom Trautmann

We invited Trautmann to tell us why he writes about Indian war elephants, and how. He touched on several topics in the process: the value of analytical accidents, the recovery of lost knowledge systems, and the power and pluralism of human logics.

Philip Corr · 31 March 2023

Personality Neuroscience: An Emerging Field with Bright Prospects

The journal Personality Neuroscience opened shop in 2018. It was established to provide an outlet for high-quality research at the interface of personality and neuroscience. As our editorial illustrates (Corr & Mobbs, 2023), the journal has made considerable progress, but more is needed. The editors and editorial board are committed to ensuring that this “emerging […]

Related Tags

Open Access
Adele Goldberg
Barbara McClintock
Caroline Herschel
Cathleen Morawetz
Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin
View all tags

Latest Tweets

As France completes its second round of elections, build your knowledge of elections around the world with our curated collection of books and journals. 🗳️ 🔗 https://cup.org/3zxqzHf #FrenchElections

Image for the Tweet beginning: As France completes its second

"an invaluable account of a wild ride in Britain's political history" - Anne McElvoy, @politico @AnthonySeldon, @Tom__Egerton and their team uncover the ultimate 'Conservative Effect' on the United Kingdom. Available now at all good bookstores! #GeneralElection2024

Image for the Tweet beginning: "an invaluable account of a

Are you voting in the UK #GeneralElection2024 today? Boost your political insight with our specially curated collection of books and journals. 📚🗳️ 🔗 https://cup.org/3XPt6GM

Image for the Tweet beginning: Are you voting in the

IMAGES

Variable mean differences between boys and girls.
Variable mean differences between boys and girls.
Defining one variable in terms of another variable
PPT
PPT
Boy Or Girl Chart in Illustrator, PDF

VIDEO

Amazingly variable fruit color😋😁😄#funny #asmr #viral #shorts #short
Boy Sighting For Girl 💟 Girl Cute Moments 😉 Boy Loving On Girl ❤️ #boysightingforgirl #boylove
Artist Attitude Boy 😱 Attitude Boy Wants Good Girl 😰 True Lover 💕 Boy Shocks #shorts #viral #love ❤
How to Do true Love with a Girl or Boy
The variable in all desired men
baby gender Concept-1 with placenta||anterior means girl||posterior means boy||gender||@Ammateju

COMMENTS

23 signs you're having a boy
You're asked to show your hands and you present them palms down. You lie on your left side when sleeping. Your urine is bright yellow. You were the more aggressive partner during love-making when you conceived. You eat a clove of garlic and the smell seeps out of your pores. Your previous child's first word was "dada".
Fetal Presentation, Position, and Lie (Including Breech Presentation
In face presentation, the baby's neck arches back so that the face presents first rather than the top of the head.. In brow presentation, the neck is moderately arched so that the brow presents first.. Usually, fetuses do not stay in a face or brow presentation. These presentations often change to a vertex (top of the head) presentation before or during labor.
Fetal presentation: Breech, posterior, transverse lie, and more
Fetal presentation, or how your baby is situated in your womb at birth, is determined by the body part that's positioned to come out first, and it can affect the way you deliver. At the time of delivery, 97 percent of babies are head-down (cephalic presentation).
Cephalic presentation
In obstetrics, a cephalic presentation or head presentation or head-first presentation is a situation at childbirth where the fetus is in a longitudinal lie and the head enters the pelvis first; the most common form of cephalic presentation is the vertex presentation, where the occiput is the leading part (the part that first enters the birth canal). All other presentations are abnormal ...
It's Baby Girl Ultrasound at 18 weeks
Bouncing Baby Girl Ultrasound at 18 weeksWelcome to Daily Ultrasound CasesA YouTube Channel dedicated to ultrasound education and cases ideal for medical st...
Signs It's a Boy or a Girl: Predicting the Sex of Your Baby
Position of the linea nigra. If your linea nigra (the line of pigmentation on your belly) runs only up to the belly button, some say you're having a girl. If it runs past the belly button and up toward the ribs, it's a boy. Nipple color. Darker nipples mean you're having a boy, the legend goes.
Gender Ultrasound: Am I Having a Boy or Girl?
A genital tubercle angled downwards. If it's pointed downward, it indicates a girl. This "nub" won't elongate and will instead develop into the clitoris. Three lines. Rather than the dome sign, seeing what looks like three light, layered lines (also called the "hamburger sign") in the genital area indicates a girl.
Foetal Gender and Obstetric Outcome
The .gov means it's official. ... The available studies on foetal gender as a specific influencing variable during pregnancy and birth are limited. In comparison our knowledge on the progress of infantile growth is relatively certain. ... 47.3 % girls) and transverse presentation (53.8 % boys, 46.2 % girls) and there are significantly more ...
Patterns of Gender Development
The results showed that 25% of children used gender labels by 17 months and 68% by 21 months. On average, girls produced labels at 18 months, one month earlier than did boys. These labeling results were used to predict changes in gender-typed behavior with the two most strongly gender-typed toys (trucks and dolls).
Beyond XX and XY: The Extraordinary Complexity of Sex Determination
From the moment we are born—or even before—we are definitively labeled "boy" or "girl." Yet science points to a much more ambiguous reality. Determination of biological sex is ...
16 Ways Pregnancy Symptoms Predict Gender
This article was originally published on February 15, 2017. It was updated on January 28, 2021 by Katrina Butcher. It can be a long nine months waiting to find out if it's going to be a boy or a girl, especially if baby is being uncooperative at the 20-week scan. Ordinarily, most parents-to-be will be asked, when having an ultrasound, if they would like to find out the sex of their growing baby.
Gender as a social and structural variable: research perspectives from
INTRODUCTION. Gender is a multidimensional construct with multiple domains that influence human health: identity and expression; roles and norms; relations; and power [].Gender identity refers to a core element of a person's individual sense of self and gender expression describes how a person communicates their gender to others through their behavior and appearance.
33 Old Wives' Tales for Predicting a Baby's Gender
And according to this old wives' tale, your baby's heart rate can predict their gender! The Myth. Girl: If your baby's fetal heart rate is above 140 beats per minute (bpm), you're having a girl. Boy: If your baby's heartbeat is less than 140 bpm, then it's a sign you're having a boy. The Reality.
Baby Gender Prediction: Myths and Facts
Pendulum Test. Gajus/Shutterstock. This myth about gender prediction might seem strange, but it's all in good fun. Dangle a chain with a pendulum (or charm or ring) over your belly. If it swings ...
Placenta Posterior
Myth 2: Posterior placenta is the best placental position. According to studies, there is no 'best' placental position. But, posterior placental positioning is considered one of the ideal positions as it allows the baby to move to the vaginal canal easily. Myth 3: Posterior placenta can determine the gender of the baby.
Gender in Childhood Goes Beyond Pink or Blue
First, based on large scale meta-analyses across domains of cognitive abilities, communication, personality and social variables, psychological well-being, and motor behaviors, the research is very clear that gender differences are usually either very small or non-existent. Indeed, 78% of all the effect sizes examined in meta-analyses indicated ...
PDF Probability: Random Variables
baby's sex (0 for boys, 1 for girls) (since if we know the birth weight of a baby, that may give us some information about whether that baby is a boy or a girl, as, on average, baby boys tend to be a little larger than newborn girls). Random variables can be discrete or continuous. A discrete random variable can take one

23 signs you're having a boy

Looking for the best deal on baby gear?

21 signs you're having a girl

Baby gender predictor: boy or girl?

Can my baby’s movements predict if I’m having a boy or a girl?

Twin pregnancy symptoms: 11 early signs

Where to go next

Fetal Presentation, Position, and Lie (Including Breech Presentation)

Position and Presentation of the Fetus

Variations in Fetal Position and Presentation

Occiput posterior position

Breech presentation

Other presentations

Breech, posterior, transverse lie: What position is my baby in?

Fetal presentation and position

Head down, facing down (anterior position)

Head down, facing up (posterior position)

Frank breech

Complete breech

Incomplete breech

Single footling breech

Double footling breech

Transverse lie

Oblique lie

9 of the most jaw-dropping breech birth photos

What to know if your baby is breech

What's a sunny-side up baby?

11 stunning photos of placentas

Where to go next

How to Tell if You’re Having a Boy or Girl on an Ultrasound

About What to Expect

Patterns of Gender Development

Diane N. Ruble

INTRODUCTION

HOW EARLY DO CHILDREN ACQUIRE GENDER CONCEPTS AND EXHIBIT PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION?

Do Infants Understand and Use Gender?

When Do Children Develop Stereotypes?

When Do Children Exhibit Prejudice and Discrimination?

Attitudes about the two sexes

Ingroup/outgroup biases

Awareness of status differences and discrimination

Gender prejudice and discrimination

Reactions to gender norm violations

Preferential treatment

HOW STABLE ARE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN GENDER TYPING?

Evidence of the Stability of Gender Typing from Longitudinal Studies

Longitudinal studies examining the stability of sex segregation

Longitudinal studies of the stability of interests and activity preferences

Interpretations and Conclusions About the Evidence from Longitudinal Studies

HOW DOES THE STUDY OF GENDER DEVELOPMENT BENEFIT FROM DYNAMIC ANALYSES?

Dynamics and Complex Systems: Basic Concepts

Children's Play Choices: Sex Segregation as a Dynamic System

Variability in Systems: Sex Segregation, Gender-Typed Activities, and Gender Identity

Dynamic Contexts: Gender Cognitions and Socialization

Methods and Analyses of Dynamic Systems

Dynamic Analyses of Gendered Play Partners and Activities

Data visualization, attractors, and repellors in children's sex segregation

Self-organized criticality in the temporal patterning of children's gendered behavior

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

LITERATURE CITED

Beyond XX and XY: The Extraordinary Complexity of Sex Determination

On supporting science journalism

16 Ways Pregnancy Symptoms Predict Gender

8 Strollers That Are Really Easy To Steer

16 Morning Sickness?

15 Positioning Of The Linea Nigra

14 Speed Of The Baby’s Heart Beat

13 Carrying High Or Low?

12 Increased Hunger

11 Sugar And Spice And All Things Nice

10 Hormone Levels

9 Increased Breast Size

8 Left Breast Bigger Than The Right

7 Acne Development

6 Hairy Legs

5 Clumsier Than Normal

4 Dry Skin Like The Sahara Desert

3 Cold, Cold Feet

2 More Toilet Time