In the case of beta bias, there's a misinterpretation of behaviour because theories or research minimise/ignore sex differences, assumes findings can equallyapply to males and females.
For example, biological research into the fight/flight system which is often carried out using male animals. It was assumed that this wasn't a problem, as they assumed the fight/flight response would be the same for both sexes.
Theoriesfocused on males. Because of beta bias, we're left with a view of humannature that is assumed to apply to both men and women, but actually has an Androcentrism view.
For example, Asch uses androcentric samples in his conformity studies.
Gender-biased research may create misleadingassumptions about female behaviour, failing to challenge negativestereotypes and validating discriminatorypractices.
It could provide scientific 'justification' to deny women opportunities within wider society - like in the workplace.
For example, many feminist commentators have objected to the diagnostic category PMS, arguing that it stereotypes and trivialises the femaleexperience. Critics claim it is a social construction that medicalises female emotions by explained them in hormonal terms.
In contract, male anger, for example, is seen as a rational response to external pressures.
Contemporary psychologists have looked for ways to reduce gender bias. One way proposed is to take a feminist approach which aims to restore the imbalance in both psychological theories and research.
Feminist commentators like Judith Worrell created a criteria to minimise and avoid gender bias in research. This includes that women should be used as genuine participants in research, rather than objects of the study, and that they should be studied within meaningfulreal-life contexts.
It also includes that research should study diverse samples of women, rather than simply focusing on the difference between men and women. And finally, that there should be greater emphasis placed on collaborative research that collect qualitative data.
Also, the laboratory experiment places women in an inequitable relationship with a (usually male) researcher who has the power to unreasonably label them as irrational and incapable.