Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health: The Brovermans' findings reexamined

This study attempted to evaluate the progress of mental health professionals regarding sex-role stereotyping in clinical functioning, identified as a problem over 10 years ago by Broverman et al. (Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1970, 34, 1–7). A comparable format and questionnaire were used in order to replicate faithfully the earlier study and facilitate past-present comparisons. One hundred four psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers were randomly assigned to three instruction-set conditions in completing the Stereotype Questionnaire: sexunspecified adult instruction set, female instruction set, and male instruction set. No significant differences were found related to sex of clinician. A significant effect (p<.001) was found for social desirability and what was judged as healthy for sex-unspecified adults. No significant relationship was found, however, for social desirability of traits and conventional sex-role stereotypes. Based on the results of this study it is possible to speculate either that the Boverman results were primarily an artifact of their forced-choice methodology or that progress has been made in a more nonsexist direction among mental health professionals. Limitations of this research are presented and considered relative to the Brovermans' study. The basically attitudinal nature of this work is noted and the question is raised as to whether nonsexist attitudes are translated into nonsexist clinical functioning.