Adolescents often respond aggressively to male threats, reflecting social pressures to conform. The study suggests that interventions during puberty could reduce harmful male behaviors.
A new study shows that the impact of pressure during puberty is stereotypically masculine.
Research indicates that adolescents are more aggressive when their masculinity is perceived as threatened, particularly when they are subjected to social pressures to conform to traditional masculine norms. The study highlights the importance of addressing these pressures during puberty to prevent negative behaviors linked to fragile masculinities.
It has long been established that some men become aggressive when they feel their masculinity is threatened. When does this behavior emerge during development and why? A new study by a team of psychology researchers shows that adolescents can also react aggressively when they feel their masculinity is threatened, particularly boys who grow up in environments where gender norms are rigid and stereotypical.
The results, published today (July 15) in the journal Developmental scienceshighlight the effects of the social pressure many boys face to be stereotypically masculine.
Social pressures and negative behaviors related to threats to masculinity
“We know that not all men respond aggressively to threats to their masculinity. In our previous work, we found that it is primarily men who are socially pressured to be stereotypically masculine who are most aggressive in the face of such threats,” says Adam Stanaland, a postdoctoral researcher at
” data-gt-translate-attributes=”({“attribute”:”data-cmtooltip”, “format”:”html”})” tabindex=”0″ role=”link”>New York University and the study’s lead author. “We now have evidence that some adolescents respond in similar ways, which sheds light on the underpinnings of these potentially harmful processes.”
“Beyond aggression, threats to masculinity are associated with a wide range of negative and antisocial behaviors, such as sexism, homophobia, political bigotry, and even anti-environmentalism,” Stanaland adds. “Our findings call for actively challenging the restrictive norms and social pressure that boys face to be stereotypically masculine, particularly during puberty and from their parents and peers.”
Study design and experimental setup
Studies have long shown that perceived threats to men’s “gender typicality”—the alignment of their appearance and behavior with societal expectations of women and men—can lead them to engage in harmful behaviors designed to reaffirm their typicality. The researchers in the new study sought to understand how this phenomenon develops and the social environments in which it occurs.
Stanaland, then a doctoral student at Duke University, led the experiment, which included more than 200 American adolescents and one of their parents. The boys first indicated the extent to which their motivation to be masculine was driven by internal reasons or by a desire to gain approval or avoid disapproval from others. The boys then played a game in which they answered five stereotypical questions about masculinity (e.g., “Which of these tools is a Phillips screwdriver?”) and five stereotypical questions about femininity (e.g., “Which of these flowers is a poppy fairy?”). They were randomly told that their score was either atypical for their gender (i.e., more like girls and a “threat” to their masculinity) or typical for their gender (i.e., more like other boys and nonthreatening).
To measure aggression, the study authors then asked participants to take part in a cognitive task: completing a series of words (e.g., “GU_”) that could be completed aggressively (e.g., “GUN”) or not (e.g., “GUY” or “GUT”). In this commonly used task, the key indicator is the proportion of words completed aggressively.
Results and implications for future research
The study also controlled for demographics and other variables. To determine the stage of life when gender typicality might affect aggression, the boys, with parental approval, answered questions on the Pubertal Development Scale, a standard and validated measure of puberty. They answered questions about changes in their voice and facial hair growth, among other things, rated on the following scale: 1 = not yet started, 2 = barely started, 3 = definitely started, or 4 = seems complete. Given the sensitivity of this scale, participants were allowed to select “I don’t know” or “I prefer not to say” for any question.
Finally, the researchers considered environmental factors that might motivate boys to adopt gender-typical attitudes, including the pressure they reported feeling from peers, parents, and themselves. They also asked participating parents about their gender beliefs.
Questions and data can be found on the Center for Open Science website website.
The experimental results showed the following:
- Like young adult men, adolescents in mid- to late puberty (but not before) respond aggressively to perceived threats to their gender typicality.
- Aggression was increased in boys whose motivation to be gender typical was due to peer pressure (i.e., driven by social expectations) rather than their own instincts.
- Boys most likely to reveal this “pressured motivation” were those whose parents endorsed stereotypical beliefs about male status and power (e.g., that men should have more power than people of the other gender).
“Male aggression poses challenges to societies around the world, from public safety to intimate personal relationships,” says Andrei Cimpian, a professor in the Department of Psychology at New York University and lead author of the study. “By identifying when and why some boys begin to respond aggressively to male threats, this research is a first step in preventing the development of ‘fragile’ masculinities—masculinities that must be constantly proven and reaffirmed—and their many negative consequences in adult men.”
Reference: “Adolescents’ Aggressive Responses to Perceived Threats to Their Gender Typicality” by Adam Stanaland, Sarah Gaither, Anna Gassman-Pines, Daniela Galvez-Cepeda, and Andrei Cimpian, July 15, 2024, Developmental sciences.
DOI: 10.1111/desc.13544
Other authors of the study include Duke University professors Sarah Gaither and Anna Gassman-Pines, and Daniela Galvez-Cepeda, a research assistant in Cimpian’s Cognitive Development Lab and a recent Williams College graduate.
The research was funded in part by the Charles Lafitte Foundation.