Recognizing the centrality of gender identity and stereotype knowledge in gender development and moving toward theoretical integration: reply to Bandura and Bussey (2004).

Most of the critique in the A. Bandura and K. Bussey (see record 2004-18097-001) commentary is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the points made by C. L. Martin, D. N. Ruble, and J. Szkrybalo in their 2002 Psychological Bulletin article (see record 2002-18663-003). First, Martin et al. never intended to present a comprehensive theory; instead, it was a review of 2 different cognitive approaches to gender development. Second, there is no time line test that has been failed; instead, gender cognitions may occur earlier than initially believed. Third, Bandura and Bussey dismissed central gender cognitions-gender identity and gender stereotype knowledge-despite considerable evidence in their support. Fourth, Bandura and Bussey never addressed the gaps and ambiguities inherent in their theory that Martin et al. questioned in their earlier article. Finally, Bandura and Bussey's misunderstandings of cognitive theorists' views on socialization agents, sociocultural influences, agency, and motivation created theoretical rifts where none exist. ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)