“In Search of Token Women in Academia”

Some Definitions and Clarifications

Carlotta Joyner Young, Doris Layton Mackenzie, Carolyn Wood Sherif

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article makes an important distinction between two definitions of “token woman.” In the first definition, a token woman is one of few women in a predominantly male setting. The second meaning of “Token Woman” identifies that subset of such women who have made the distinctive psychological adaptation described by Laws (1975). The methodological decisions in Young, MacKenzie, and Sherif's (1980) research are justified as based on that definitional distinction. Constantinople's critique is shown to be appropriate as an alternative to Laws' theory, but not as a criticism of our research. Alternative generational explanations for previous findings about Token Women are not supported by existing data.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)166-169
Number of pages4
JournalPsychology of Women Quarterly
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1982

Fingerprint

Law
Psychological Adaptation
Research
criticism
Psychological
Constantinople
Criticism

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gender Studies
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Young, Carlotta Joyner ; Mackenzie, Doris Layton ; Sherif, Carolyn Wood. / “In Search of Token Women in Academia” : Some Definitions and Clarifications. In: Psychology of Women Quarterly. 1982 ; Vol. 7, No. 2. pp. 166-169.
@article{384a18bfd4c34282af1428ed12dd220d,
title = "“In Search of Token Women in Academia”: Some Definitions and Clarifications",
abstract = "This article makes an important distinction between two definitions of “token woman.” In the first definition, a token woman is one of few women in a predominantly male setting. The second meaning of “Token Woman” identifies that subset of such women who have made the distinctive psychological adaptation described by Laws (1975). The methodological decisions in Young, MacKenzie, and Sherif's (1980) research are justified as based on that definitional distinction. Constantinople's critique is shown to be appropriate as an alternative to Laws' theory, but not as a criticism of our research. Alternative generational explanations for previous findings about Token Women are not supported by existing data.",
author = "Young, {Carlotta Joyner} and Mackenzie, {Doris Layton} and Sherif, {Carolyn Wood}",
year = "1982",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1471-6402.1982.tb00829.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "7",
pages = "166--169",
journal = "Psychology of Women Quarterly",
issn = "0361-6843",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "2",

}

“In Search of Token Women in Academia” : Some Definitions and Clarifications. / Young, Carlotta Joyner; Mackenzie, Doris Layton; Sherif, Carolyn Wood.

In: Psychology of Women Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 2, 01.01.1982, p. 166-169.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - “In Search of Token Women in Academia”

T2 - Some Definitions and Clarifications

AU - Young, Carlotta Joyner

AU - Mackenzie, Doris Layton

AU - Sherif, Carolyn Wood

PY - 1982/1/1

Y1 - 1982/1/1

N2 - This article makes an important distinction between two definitions of “token woman.” In the first definition, a token woman is one of few women in a predominantly male setting. The second meaning of “Token Woman” identifies that subset of such women who have made the distinctive psychological adaptation described by Laws (1975). The methodological decisions in Young, MacKenzie, and Sherif's (1980) research are justified as based on that definitional distinction. Constantinople's critique is shown to be appropriate as an alternative to Laws' theory, but not as a criticism of our research. Alternative generational explanations for previous findings about Token Women are not supported by existing data.

AB - This article makes an important distinction between two definitions of “token woman.” In the first definition, a token woman is one of few women in a predominantly male setting. The second meaning of “Token Woman” identifies that subset of such women who have made the distinctive psychological adaptation described by Laws (1975). The methodological decisions in Young, MacKenzie, and Sherif's (1980) research are justified as based on that definitional distinction. Constantinople's critique is shown to be appropriate as an alternative to Laws' theory, but not as a criticism of our research. Alternative generational explanations for previous findings about Token Women are not supported by existing data.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84981661926&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84981661926&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1982.tb00829.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1982.tb00829.x

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 166

EP - 169

JO - Psychology of Women Quarterly

JF - Psychology of Women Quarterly

SN - 0361-6843

IS - 2

ER -