Citation

Gomes B, Abramowitz SI. Sex Roles 1976; 2(1): 1-13.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1976, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/BF00289293

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to submit the claim of sex-related bias in clinical judgment to more thorough empirical testing than had been the case in previous research. Patient sex and stereotypic sex-role were factorially varied in a clinical protocol that was sent with related materials to 640 sex-stratified, randomly selected Members and Fellows of APA Division 29 (Psychotherapy). Approximately 30% ( N =182) of those contacted returned usable data, including information about their own sex-role traditionalism and evaluation of the hypothetical patients' psychological well-being. Results confirmed the effectiveness of the stereotypic sex-role manipulation. However, no consistent effects were found for any of the four variables of interest considered in isolation or in combination, thereby refuting allegations of covert sex-related discrimination perpetrated under the aegis of psychological appraisal. Favorableness of clinical impressions was not mediated by therapists' self-reported attitudes toward the patients. The study's generally unexpected outcome was tentatively attributed to enhanced professional sensitization to the sociocultural barriers to full psychological functioning in women.