Keywords
Women Psychology
Gender
Turkish Novels
Thematic Unit Analysis
How to Cite
Abstract
Theory of social representations says the group affects its member and at the same time the member affects its group. As people interact with each other, they reconstruct the world socially. This mutual interaction leads to a new type of knowledge. This knowledge is called everyday knowledge. Biological sex does not inform us about issues like gender roles, inequality between genders, women in the workplace whereas gender does; because gender is reconstructed. Language has a role in keeping, transferring and even reconstructing the daily knowledge. At this point, initial aim of this study is to investigate social representations of psychology of gender and women in Turkish Novels from early period of Turkey and 2010’s. Second aim is to compare the social representations between the novels of female and male authors within the same period. The last aim is to see the possible changes in social representations by time according to the female authors and male authors. Male gender roles and objectification of men’s body increase; sexism and violence do not change; marginalization of women decreases but the myth of “men as hero” starts to exist by time. On the other hand, female and male authors generally do not differ from each other at the same time period. This study differs from psychological novel analysis and also novel analysis in Turkish Literature since the study is based on Theory of Social Representations and conducted through Thematic Unit Analysis.
References
Adak, S. (2010). Construction of gendered identities in Turkish national memory: ‘Our’ women and ‘other’ women in the stories of Ömer Seyfettin. Çankaya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(1), 75-100.
Adana, F., Arslantaş, H., Ergin, F., Biçer, N., Kıranşal, N. ve Şahin, S. (2011). Views of male university students about social gender roles: An example from east of Turkey. Journal of Family Violence, 26, 519-526.
Adıvar, H. E. (2014). Handan. İstanbul: Can Sanat Yayınları.
Akdeniz, S. (2008). Tanzimat dönemi edebiyatçılarının kadın problemine yaklaşım biçimleri. Ege Üniversitesi Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Araştırma Dergisi, 15, 1- 32.
Arat, Y. (2011). Çekişme ve işbirliği: Türkiye’de kadınların güçlenme mücadeleleri. R. Kasaba, (Ed.), Türkiye tarihi: Modern Dünyada Türkiye: 1839-2010 içinde (415-449). İstanbul: Kitap Yayınevi.
Aubrey, J. S. (2006). Effects of sexually objectifying media on self-objectification and body surveillance in undergraduates: Results of a 2-year panel study. Journal of Communication, 56, 366-386.
Aygün, G. S. (2010). Ölmüş bir kadının evrak-ı metrukesi. İstanbul: Lacivert Yayıncılık.
Aytaş, G. (2002). Batılılaşma maceramızda Türk romanına yansıyan tipler –I-. G. Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 133-148.
Bauer, M. W. ve Gaskell, G. (1999). Towards a paradigm in research on social representations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 29(2), 163-186.
Bilgin, N. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde içerik analizi: Teknikler ve örnek çalışmalar. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
Budak, C. (2018). The past and the present of feminist movement in Turkey. Dijital Çağda İşletmecilik Dergisi, 1(1), 38-49.
Burcu, E. (2002). Tanzimat dönemi Türk romanında kadın üzerine bir değerlendirme. Kadın/Women 2000, 3(2), 47-70.
Carli, L. L. (2001). Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 725-741.
Ceran, D. (2002). Mürebbiyelik ve Türk romanında bazı mürebbiye tipleri. Türkiyat Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12, 215-227.
Cirhinoğlu, F. G., Aktaş, V. ve Öner-Özkan, B. (2006). Sosyal temsil kuramına genel bir bakış. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30(2), 163-174.
Coşkun, B. (2010). Türk modernleşmesini kadın romanları üzerinden okumak. Turkish Studies, 5(4), 930-964.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1): 37–46.
Crawford, M. (2012). Transformations: Women, gender, & psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Erden-İmamoğlu, S. (2013). Gender roles and social identification: The two major factors to shape Turkish women. Education, 134(1), 82-93.
Esendal, M. Ş. (2013). Ayaşlı ile kiracıları. Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi.
Franzoi, S. L. (2009). Social Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Fredrickson, B. L. ve Roberts, T. (1997). Towards understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173-206.
Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research: Gathering and analyzing data. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Helgeson, V. S. (2005). Psychology of gender. Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hogg, A. M. ve Abrams, D. (1988). Social Identifications. London: Routledge.
Höijer, B. (2011). Social representations theory: A new theory for media research. Nordicom Review. 32(2). 3-16.
Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (2001). An Ambivalent Alliance: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism as Complementary Justifications for Gender Inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118.
Glick, P., Sakallı-Ugurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., ve Anguiar de Souza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes towards wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 292-297.
Karabulut, M. (2013). Tanzimat dönemi Türk romanında kadın üzerine tematik bir inceleme. Erdem Dergisi, 64, 49-69.
Karaosmanoğlu, Y. K. (2014). Yaban. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
Karataş, E. (2009). Türkiye’de kadın hareketleri ve edebiyatımızda kadın sesleri. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 4(8), 1652-1673.
Kulin, A. (2013). Gizli anların yolcusu. İstanbul: Everest Yayınları.
Livaneli, Z. (2013). Kardeşimin hikayesi. İstanbul: Doğan Kitap.
Moscovici, S. (1984a). The phenomenon of social representations. R. M. Farr ve S. Moscovici, (Eds.), Social Representations içinde (3-69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Neil, J. M. (2008). Summarizing 25 years of research on men’s gender role conflict using the gender roles scale. The Counseling Psychology, 36(3), 358-445.
Öner, B. (2002). Sosyal temsiller. Kriz Dergisi, 10(1), 29-35.
Önertoy, O. (1998). Cumhuriyet Döneminde Roman. O. Önertoy, Z. Güneş ve S. Öztürk-Çelik, (Eds.), Çağdaş Türk Edebiyatı içinde (115-135). Eskişehir: Açık Öğretim Fakültesi Yayınları.
Polat-Atan, Ö. (2013, Mayıs). Tanzimat romanlarında kadın ve eğitim. Ed. M. Arslan, Uluslar Arası Türk Dili ve Edebiyatı Kongresi. International Burch University’de sunulmuş çalışma, Saray Bosna, 17-19 Mayıs (ss. 223-237). Sarajevo: Burc University Publication.
Potter, J. ve Edwards, D. (1999). Social representations and discursive psychology: From cognition to action. Culture and Psychology, 5(4), 447-458.
Robinson, D. T. ve Schwartz, J. P. (2004). Relationship between gender roles conflict and attitudes towards women and African Americans. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 5(1), 65-71.
Tan, C. (2013). İz. İstanbul: Altın Kitaplar Yayınevi.
Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A. ve Sears, D. O. (2006). Social psychology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Tazeoğlu, K. (2014). Bukre. İstanbul: Destek Yayınları.
Vandello, J. A. ve Cohen, D. (2008). Culture, gender, and men’s intimate partner violence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(2), 652-657.
VERBI Software – Consult – Sozialforschung GmbH (2013). MAXQDA11: Software for Qualitative Data Analysis [Software]. http://www.maxqda.com/
White, J. W., Smith, P. H., Koss, M. P. ve Figueredo, A. J. (2000). Intimate partner aggression: What have we learned? Comment on Archer (2000). Psychological Bulletin, 126, 690-696.
Williams, J. H. (1987). Psychology of Women. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Yapar-Gönenç, A. (2006). Fransa’da ve Türkiye’de kadın hareketleri. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 63-84.
Zemore, S. E., Fiske, S. T. ve Kim, H. (2000). Gender stereotypes and the dynamics of social interaction. T. Eckers ve H. M. Trautners, (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender içinde (247-242). Mahvah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2018 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi