The aim of study was to investigate the relationship between proactive coping strategies and the dimensions of identity formation, along with the role of biological sex and psychological gender as moderators for this relationship. We conducted analyses aimed at showing differences in terms of identity dimensions levels and proactive coping strategies used by a group of individuals with different biological sex and psychological gender. A group of 101 students from upper secondary schools from Pomeranian Voivodeship took part in the study. (...) We used in our research The Dimensions of Identity Development Scale; The Psychological Gender Inventory and The Proactive Coping Inventory for Adolescents. We found, among others, that in the case of a proactive strategy, biological sex turned out to be a significant moderator in the relationship between this variable and identity dimensions: ruminative exploration, commitment-making and identification with commitment. In the case of instrumental support seeking, psychological gender turned out to be a significant moderator for the relationship between these variables and a part of identity dimensions. The obtained results show that, regardless of whether young people, in terms of characteristics that are stereotypically associated with biological sex, are described as aschematic or schematic when entering adulthood and attempting to constitute themselves, more often cope in a task-oriented manner by trying to create a set of information useful in difficult situations and aspire to obtain informational support from individuals in one’s own social network, who are regarded as safe people. (shrink)

The aim of this article is to draw attention to the fact that the constructions of gender - frequently quantified in scientific research —are unstable across time and space. In this regard, we look at the genesis of the measures and definitions reflective of the social change and knowledge that has shaped views on the gender dimensions. Our analysis of gender measures shows that the majority are based on definitions that conceive of femininity and masculinity as stable personality traits and (...) that these measures are part of essentialist assumptions on gender roles and gender identity. We consider these measures to be strongly stereotypical and “outdated”. In the second part, we put forward evidence, from research findings, that indicates that perceptions of gender have not just changed over time. Different interpretations of masculinity and femininity exist within specific cultures, social categories and spaces. (shrink)