-differences between men & women are minimised, tends to be done on research with only male participants
-example: Kohlberg's theory of moral development - just done on American males but generalised to males; Zimbardo; Milgram; Asch
-example: research into fight-or-flight response assumes men & women respond in the same way, Taylor et al (2000): oxytocin is more present in females, they have a tend and befriend response, they are less stressed
-the use of male participants & male researchers when theories are centred in on males due to research
-this can be conscious or unconscious
-example: PMS - female experiences & behaviours before menstruation can be pathologised, to the male standard this behaviour is abnormal to males, male anger is justified
-gender bias is sexist, it focuses on males (male ppts & male researchers), this is unfair to women as they are not involved in the sample and when they are in research, it is not suited to them. Not good for universality. May not know about some female behaviours. D: can replicate on women ppts e.g., Milgram's study
-female behaviour may be ignored/disorders may not be diagnosed. There are stereotyped e.g., females may not be diagnosed with SCZ when they should be. Harmful for females e.g., calling them irrational. Behaviour gets pathologised. This is unethical & prevents psychology from achieving its aim
-gender bias allows for reflexivity which is good for psychology. This makes people aware of gender bias/can help reduce gender bias. Research findings then may not be used or will be used with caution, people will not internalise the findings which reduces the social sensitivity of research. This means that gender bias can be positive if it is addressed by the researchers.