Terms such as boys and girls, men and women, males and females, masculinity and femininity present plausible categories meaning the dichotomous groups of
33
human beings in the world. Some psychologists prefer to use the term “sex” only when they are referring to biological distinctions between males and females, while reserving the term “gender” to refer to the psychological features or attributes connected with the biological categories (Deaux, 1985; Unger, 1979, 1989). Levy (1989) articulated this distinction as follows: “The term sex is used to refer to the grouping of people into the two distinct biologically defined groups of female and male. Gender, in turn, refers to the social categorizing of individual based on social standards and ascriptions” (p.306). Therefore, sex refers to the biological categories of male and female distinguished by genes, chromosomes, and hormones. “Culture has no influence on one’s sex. Gender, by contrast, is a much more fluid category. It refers to the social categories of male and female” (Helgeson, 2009, p.3).
However, according to Halpern (2012), “gender” was originally a grammar term used in languages that make a distinction between feminine and masculine nouns. It’s not associated with maleness or femaleness. She further suggested that “gender” may encompass both biological and psychosocial aspects of being male or female since the term “gender” is more commonly used in studies. Language is a living phenomenon and the meaning of words change over time. As a way of presenting the literature as precisely as possible with the language of the researchers, “gender” is used more frequently when discussing the studies relating to these two groups. Hence, in the following part of the present study, the term “gender” would be used to discuss the effects of gender on language learning strategy use concerning the biological and psychosocial aspects.
In biological hypotheses, at around the same time of Oxford’s early language learning strategy studies, Geschwind-Galaburda’s theory of prenatal hormones effects about the relationship between hormone levels and cognition provided the possible explanation or answers to questions about why verbal abilities may be dependent on
34
sex hormones (Geschwind,1983, 1984; Geschwind & Galaburda, 1987). This theory posits that the prenatal sex hormones that both direct and reflect the sexual differentiation of the fetus also exert powerful influences on the central nervous system of developing organisms.
Proponents of this theory assert that high levels of testosterone slow the growth of neurons in the left hemisphere, so the results would be right hemisphere dominance which means that the right hemisphere has greater control than the left hemisphere for many cognitive and motor functions and manifested in left-handedness (Papadatou-Pastou, Martin, Munafo, & Jones, 2008). Geschwind and Behan mentioned (1982, 1984) an important corollary of the sex hormone hypothesis is that other susceptible organs in the developing fetus are also affected by high testosterone level, such as thymus gland, which is an essential component of the developing immune system. According to Geschwind-Galaburda’s theory, Halpern (2012, p.187) suggests that there are at least two possibilities:
1. Overall poorer performance by males on cognitive tasks that are usually associated with the left hemisphere, which generally includes verbal tasks and/or 2. Overall higher performance by males on cognitive tasks that are believed to be
primarily under right hemisphere control, which generally includes visuospatial tasks.
In psychosocial hypotheses, the syntheses and conclusions of biological differences contributing to societal expectations and the societal expectations creating and increasing biological differences are mainly concerned. Differing life experiences for males and females could be used to explain the nurture side that individuals develop in a societal context that shapes and interprets thoughts and actions in stereotypical ways. In the model of nature and nurture interaction, “nature” and
“nurture” are assumed as independent variables which combine each other in ways
35
that would not be predicted from either variable alone (Halpern, 2012).
The environmental and social factors play a major role in the cognitive development of every member in our society. Socialization practices and other life experiences that differ for males and females influence the ability to perform intellectual tasks. Harris (1998) referred to the belief that psychosocial factors are primary responsible for the differences in the lives of males and females as the
“nurture assumption.” Differences in sex roles are caused by variables near the nurture end of the nature-nurture continuum so that nurture variables are rooted in societal practices and societies can change.
In biopsychosocial hypotheses, researchers recognize that nature and nurture are inextricably entwined. Biology responds to the environment and people adjust and select their environment to make it compatible with their biological propensities. The architecture of the brain is “established early in life through a continuous series of dynamic interactions between genetic influences and environmental conditions and experience” (Fox, Levitt, & Nelson, 2010, p.28).
Halpern (2012) provided a schematic diagram of a biopsychosocial model in which nature and nurture are continuous and inseparable in figure 4. This figure showed: 1) thoughts and behaviors which are biologically mediated processes arising from brain activity, can alter the environment experienced by individual, which in turn can alter brain development and other internal processes (e.g., hormone secretions); 2) genetic potential also can be affected by environmental stimuli (e.g., some drugs), causing changes in biological processes (e.g., signs of aging), which in turn can alter the environmental experiences to which each individual is exposed; 3) cultural variables (the social part of the model) can create differences in the brain and other biological systems. The experiences that people have throughout life can create, reduce, or magnify gender differences in the biology of male and female.
36
Figure 4. A schematic diagram of a biopsychosocial model (Halpern, 2012, p.16)