Culture and Child Attachment Patterns: a Behavioral Systems Synthesis.

We propose that the two dominant culture institutions (individualist and collectivist) are neither learned nor cognitively represented by the people who practice them. Instead, they exist as group-level payoff structures that reflect differential distributions of child attachment patterns within a society. Individualist societies reflect an overrepresentation of insecure-avoidant attachments and collectivist societies reflect an overrepresentation of insecure-anxious attachments. Moreover, attachment patterns are embodied rather than representational-schedule-induced rather than incrementally shaped or verbally learned. If attachment patterns are schedule-induced, the prospects are poorer for effecting cultural change through economic incentives or informational campaigns (top-down). Rather, cultural practices will be responsive to changes in family practices-to the extent they affect attachment patterns (bottom-up). For example, if breastfeeding rates decline or the workforce participation of women increases, a society will become more individualist and less collectivist. That is because those practices increase avoidant as compared to anxious attachments. Moreover, because insecurely attached children are behaviorally less flexible than are securely attached children, the former have a greater impact on cultural practices than do the latter.

Do Gender Differences in Perceived Prototypical Computer Scientists and Engineers Contribute to Gender Gaps in Computer Science and Engineering?

Women are vastly underrepresented in the fields of computer science and engineering (CS&E). We examined whether women might view the intellectual characteristics of prototypical individuals in CS&E in more stereotype-consistent ways than men might and, consequently, show less interest in CS&E. We asked 269 U.S. college students (187, 69.5% women) to describe the prototypical computer scientist (Study 1) or engineer (Study 2) through open-ended descriptions as well as through a set of trait ratings. Participants also rated themselves on the same set of traits and rated their similarity to the prototype. Finally, participants in both studies were asked to describe their likelihood of pursuing future college courses and careers in computer science (Study 1) or engineering (Study 2). Across both studies, we found that women offered more stereotype-consistent ratings than did men of the intellectual characteristics of prototypes in CS (Study 1) and engineering (Study 2). Women also perceived themselves as less similar to the prototype than men did. Further, the observed gender differences in prototype perceptions mediated the tendency for women to report lower interest in CS&E fields relative to men. Our work highlights the importance of prototype perceptions for understanding the gender gap in CS&E and suggests avenues for interventions that may increase women's representation in these vital fields.