@proceedings{203066,
  keywords = {Social Cognition, functional explanations, normative judgments, gender, essentialism},
  author = {Emily Foster-Hanson and Tania Lombrozo},
  editor = { and  and  and },
  title = {What are Men and Mothers for? The Causes and Consequences of Functional Reasoning about Social Categories},
  abstract = {<p>Do people attribute functions to gendered social categories? (For instance, is there something men or mothers are for?) And if so, do such attributions of function have consequences for normative judgments about what members of these social categories ought to do? In the current study, participants (N = 366) rated their agreement with 15 statements about the {\textquotedblleft}true functions{\textquotedblright} of different social categories, in triads of matched masculine, feminine, and superordinate categories (e.g., fathers, mothers, and parents). Participants endorsed functional claims more for some social categories (e.g., parents) than others (e.g., kids), and their background beliefs about gender predicted variation in functional reasoning. However, across categories, participants judged that fulfilling true functions was {\textquoteleft}natural{\textquoteright} for members of the category, and they judged that category members ought to fulfill their true functions.</p>
},
  year = {2022},
  journal = {Proceedings of the 44th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society},
  pages = {824-832},
  language = {eng},
}