Identification with fictional characters in computerised fictional narrative material: Females identify more strongly with their own gender whereas males identify equally with either gender

Hook N. (2019) May the force of gender be with you: Identity, Identification and “Own-Gender Bias”. In: Barry J., Kingerlee R., Seager M., Sullivan L. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Male Psychology and Mental Health. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-04384-1_9

Abstract: In this chapter an innovative experimental methodology is described for studying identity by using identification with fictional characters in computerised fictional narrative material (hypertext). This methodology reveals an unpredicted finding that females identify more strongly with their own gender whereas males identify equally with either gender. This echoes other research findings from quite different domains, suggesting a general phenomenon. Implications for further research and how these findings might inform creative communication and mental health practice in relation to gender are discussed.


---
Someone suggests that this means than men are more compassive... But in many species, the female is more helping, even of members of other species, like in those videos of cows feeding kittens or dogs... the girls work better as nurses, school teachers, etc., than men do... They oppose the death penalty in greater numbers than men, and support more gov't expenditures, and in the US vote more Democratic than Republican than men do. So no, in their own magical way, they are more compassive... just it seems they are too feminine, more than we are too masculine (?). Maybe the guys who say they have a greater percentage of gay members than men are right, too leaning to their own conspecifics. Or as they say recently, their sexual orientation is more fluid.


Author Conclusion
This experiment has produced strong evidence (with extremely low p values) that females have an own-gender bias in character identification but males do not. We might explain this finding using several different theories, but the strong implication is that gender is a less important group identity for men than it is for women. This has implications for how we communicate with men and women across varied domains of life such as health, politics and culture. It also has implications for how we might need to design differently nuanced health messages and approaches to connect with and help vulnerable men in comparison with vulnerable women. These findings also raise the question as to whether this is a universal finding or culture-dependent.
 
 Further research will be required to answer these important questions more fully. Whatever the reason for the difference and however global it might be, it is hoped that this chapter has revealed important evidence of potentially critical gender differences, along with an important new experimental method for researching identity