COVID-19: Updates on library services and operations.

The Social psychology of female-male relations : a critical analysis of central concepts /
edited by Richard D. Ashmore, Frances K. Del Boca.
Orlando : Academic Press, 1986.
xvi, 351 p.
0120652803 (alk. paper)
More Details
Orlando : Academic Press, 1986.
0120652803 (alk. paper)
catalogue key
Includes bibliographies and indexes.
A Look Inside
Full Text Reviews
Appeared in Choice on 1986-06:
A comprehensive, thoughtful integration of the voluminous social psychology literature on female-male relationships, presented (with varying success) from a social cognition perspective. This collection offers a useful complement to Women, Gender and Social Psychology, ed. by V. O'Leary, R. Unger, and B. Wallston (CH, Sep '85). Half the book is written by the editors, well-known psychologists; the rest includes invited chapters. The first section provides a comprehensive discussion of gender identity, with a particularly strong section on alternative gender identities and two parallel chapters on gender stereotypes and attitudes. Chapters on groups include a discussion of personal relationships, an excellent contribution on role relationships, and a rather dry review chapter on task groups. The conclusion is a fine attempt to bring together these vast terrains of research. The greatest strength of the volume is at the same time its major weakness. The attempt to integrate this body of research is laudable, but some of the integration is forced, leading to rather eccentric emphases or distortions. On the whole, however, the collection is an admirably up-to-date review of an enormous research area, generally well integrated theoretically. An extremely useful resource for graduate students and researchers.-J.A. Howard, University of Washington
This item was reviewed in:
Choice, June 1986
To find out how to look for other reviews, please see our guides to finding book reviews in the Sciences or Social Sciences and Humanities.

This information is provided by a service that aggregates data from review sources and other sources that are often consulted by libraries, and readers. The University does not edit this information and merely includes it as a convenience for users. It does not warrant that reviews are accurate. As with any review users should approach reviews critically and where deemed necessary should consult multiple review sources. Any concerns or questions about particular reviews should be directed to the reviewer and/or publisher.

  link to old catalogue

Report a problem